|
Murgos posted:Stephen is prone to practicing on those more lubberly than him when they put him out of sorts. Stephen does a very good explanation of wind, tides and leeway to Jagiello at one point with the purpose of scaring him about a nearby lee shore after Jagiello beats him at chess. Stephen also cheats at cards when people annoy him. I don't think that it was cheating, he just had learned to read people from the card player he met in prison.
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 14:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:I don't think that it was cheating, he just had learned to read people from the card player he met in prison. Yeah, Stephen doesn't need to cheat to win, he's just an expert on probability and can read pupils. He doesn't always bother to exert his full powers though. He's also somewhat lucky at cards, within the special meaning that "luck" has in this series. Probably because of the common superstition that those unlucky in love are lucky at cards and vice versa. You could write a whole thing about superstition in these books. There are a few points where they almost become fantasy novels.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 15:23
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:You could write a whole thing about superstition in these books. There are a few points where they almost become fantasy novels.  Yea, the superstitions of the seamen play a prominent part now and then - things happen and meaning gets assigned by the superstitious. But where do the books nearly turn into fantasy?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Nah, I just read a section in The Surgeons Mate where Stephen consecutively cuts to aces absently while having a conversation with Jagiello. I'm not saying he doesn't also read people and understand basic probability, he just also cheats when he's annoyed at them and has an understanding of how other people might cheat at cards (Wray for example).
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 16:29
|
|
|
Nektu posted:Such as? I would have to write it all out and I'm on my phone, but basically there's no point in the series where superstition doesn't act in a manner indistinguishable from a law of nature. You can always read it two ways but I can't think or a point where the superstitions prove wrong.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 17:41
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I would have to write it all out and I'm on my phone, but basically there's no point in the series where superstition doesn't act in a manner indistinguishable from a law of nature. You can always read it two ways but I can't think or a point where the superstitions prove wrong. In The Surgeons Mate there is a section where Stephen is going to negotiate with some Catalan soldiers on a fortified island and in the lead up to it many bad omens happen. Stephens patient dies, he accidentally drops a glass of wine that Jack is handing to him, they sail on Friday and it's the 13th day of the month, etc... But nothing bad happens. Jack specifically calls out that he is going to ignore omens from now on. While touching wood of course, because that's not superstition that's just good common sense. But that's almost the exception that proves the rule, generally bad omens and superstitions pay off.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 18:00
|
|
|
Murgos posted:In The Surgeons Mate there is a section where Stephen is going to negotiate with some Catalan soldiers on a fortified island and in the lead up to it many bad omens happen. Stephens patient dies, he accidentally drops a glass of wine that Jack is handing to him, they sail on Friday and it's the 13th day of the month, etc... But nothing bad happens. Jack specifically calls out that he is going to ignore omens from now on. While touching wood of course, because that's not superstition that's just good common sense. And even then don't they crash into the French coast on the return leg?
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 18:06
|
|
|
Murgos posted:In The Surgeons Mate there is a section where Stephen is going to negotiate with some Catalan soldiers on a fortified island and in the lead up to it many bad omens happen. Stephens patient dies, he accidentally drops a glass of wine that Jack is handing to him, they sail on Friday and it's the 13th day of the month, etc... But nothing bad happens. Jack specifically calls out that he is going to ignore omens from now on. While touching wood of course, because that's not superstition that's just good common sense. Worse, the wine is specifically a toast for his safe return - that's the clearest case of something that should be an enormously bad omen that comes to nothing. I'm not so much convinced that O'Brien wants to show bad luck and superstition coming true, so much as he wants to show how the seamen constantly interpret everything through the lens of the superstition.
|
|
#
?
May 12, 2015 18:46
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:I would have to write it all out and I'm on my phone, but basically there's no point in the series where superstition doesn't act in a manner indistinguishable from a law of nature. You can always read it two ways but I can't think or a point where the superstitions prove wrong. It's confirmation bias. You're just doing the same thing as the sailors. Jack has tremendously good luck throughout his career. Good things are happening all the time. They get rescued out of awful situations all the time, but you don't attribute that to good omens. You attribute bad luck to bad omens, and when something bad happens go looking for a prior cause. Poof, you've convinced yourself bad omens are real. Arglebargle III fucked around with this message at 03:26 on May 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:I'm not so much convinced that O'Brien wants to show bad luck and superstition coming true, so much as he wants to show how the seamen constantly interpret everything through the lens of the superstition.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 05:51
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:It's confirmation bias. You're just doing the same thing as the sailors. It's a work of fiction, though! So yes, that's one reading -- but on the other hand, every time there's an omen that's fulfilled (which is almost every time there's an omen), that's a conscious narrative choice on the part of the author, so . . . Reading it all as confirmation bias and the sailors are just viewing everything through the lens of superstition is definitely a valid reading (and also the reading most consistent with the historical fiction genre). I think my point is just that an alternate reading of things, where "luck" and superstition are a lot more "real," is also possible, and very little within the narrative universe of the books conflicts with such a reading. Omens are almost always fulfilled, Jack's "Luck" does seem to be a physical quality that he has or hasn't got at different times, Stephen is lucky at cards and unlucky at love, etc. Hieronymous Alloy fucked around with this message at 11:02 on May 13, 2015 |
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 10:55
|
|
|
The thing is though that even in that sequence in the The Surgeons Mate, between the bad omens and the wreck on the French coast there are a lot of things that go perfectly. So, you can attribute the wreck to the omens but it would certainly take a bit of gymnastics to not count things like the success of the mission, the luck of intercepting the French officers before they arrive, the chancing upon the exact ship the garrison is expecting to arrive, the great time they make in traversing the channel and weathering Scilly, that Jack engages a French 74 while in a 16 gun sloop and comes out with no wounded or dead or that even during the wreck itself no one is seriously injured and the ship is able to be safely grounded.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 13:12
|
|
|
Hieronymous Alloy posted:It's a work of fiction, though! So yes, that's one reading -- but on the other hand, every time there's an omen that's fulfilled (which is almost every time there's an omen), that's a conscious narrative choice on the part of the author, so . . . Considering that maturin gives no credit at all to jacks superstitions, it makes perfect sense that they only talk about that when CLEARLY something happened that supports jack in his views and makes him speak up. This is doubly true considering O'Briens sparse storytelling - all the uninteresting conversations about omens that did not come true are simply left out.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 15:41
|
|
|
I've been able to refer to a walking sticks as phasmids two separate times to two separate parties, impressing them both times. Thank you Patrick O'Brian.
|
|
#
?
May 13, 2015 19:30
|
|
|
Started the Hornblower series, and while I like it, I wish Forester wouldn't remind me that the novel was written in a different time. Like there was a reference to how Florence Nightingale didn't exist in Hornblower's time. Maybe because it's the first novel? It really just pulls me out of the moment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Started the Hornblower series, and while I like it, I wish Forester wouldn't remind me that the novel was written in a different time. Like there was a reference to how Florence Nightingale didn't exist in Hornblower's time. Yeah, I remember that part and had the same experience. Didn't like the series much anyway. I stopped reading it at Lord Hornblower. Imo after reading Aubrey/Maturin it's better to go cold turkey than read Hornblower.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:08
|
|
|
Well I wanted to give it a shot. We'll see how far I make it. I'll probably just go back and read O'Brien again.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:09
|
|
|
Nektu posted:This is doubly true considering O'Briens sparse storytelling - all the uninteresting conversations about omens that did not come true are simply left out. I wasn't really paying attention this morning and Diane teleported three thousand miles from the Channel to Inaccessible Island.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 15:13
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:Yeah, I remember that part and had the same experience. Didn't like the series much anyway. I stopped reading it at Lord Hornblower. Imo after reading Aubrey/Maturin it's better to go cold turkey than read Hornblower. I enjoyed Hornblower (I admittedly read them before P O'B) and in fact I still think the single-ship actions are at least as well written. But there's no question that Forester can't match the authentic period feel of Aubrey and Maturin's interactions. Fundamentally different books really, Hornblower is straightforward adventure stories where the heor wins through, albeit in a very neurotic way, A-M are an extended novel of manners where the characters just happen to have amazing adventures.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:I enjoyed Hornblower (I admittedly read them before P O'B) and in fact I still think the single-ship actions are at least as well written. But there's no question that Forester can't match the authentic period feel of Aubrey and Maturin's interactions. Fundamentally different books really, Hornblower is straightforward adventure stories where the heor wins through, albeit in a very neurotic way, A-M are an extended novel of manners where the characters just happen to have amazing adventures. I agree that the ship actions are mostly good, even though the main protagonist is an insufferable wet blanket.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2015 00:59
|
|
|
I seem to recall some of the action in the earliest Hornblower books being pretty drat stupid, actually. I remember one of the stories, "The Spanish Galleys," involved him taking a ship with like four guys and a "daring" plan that didn't make any sense. The galley's huge crew just sits around like scenery while the initial fighting is going on and then they meekly surrenders for no good reason. At several points, the Spanish could have just shot him, but they didn't because that would have put Forrester out of a job. The Hornblower books are usually much better than that, but you have to accept that some of Hornblower's brilliant plans only succeed because his opponents are complete morons. Hornblower is still a fun character though. My favorite book is the one where he's on trial for trying to kill his captain and we're never entirely sure if he pushed him down that hatch or not he totally did. Anyway, I'm just wandering in to say I love these books and I've read as far as The Truelove. I thought the last few books were a little meh (maybe it was just fatigue) and I wandered off, but this thread has reminded me how badly I need to finish the series.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:23
|
|
|
Hogge Wild posted:I agree that the ship actions are mostly good, even though the main protagonist is an insufferable wet blanket. I'm starting to get this impression. I'm on the second book, Ship of the Line, now and they had this dinner party where basically he pines over a married woman and inwardly monologues about how much he hates his fat, ugly wife. I'm supposed to like this guy?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 17:57
|
|
|
Eh, kind of? One thing I think Forrester was trying to do was reflect the fundamentally flawed characters of many of the era's actual naval "heroes." Hornblower is brilliant, energetic, fearless, and (usually) has a clear sense of right and wrong -- a classic adventure protagonist -- but he's also cold, arrogant, self-centered, and prone to making unforgivably rash decisions. Also, a few of his more daring schemes could be considered war crimes. Sometimes he gets tiresome, but his peculiar sense of duty (mutiny!), his all or nothing approach to problem solving (dueling!), and his off-putting reserve (no friends!) are essential components in some of his most interesting stories.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 19:17
|
|
|
I get that characters ought to have flaws, and maybe it'd be better had I not read O'Brian first. He does it much better. Hornblower just seems whiny about how worthless he perceives himself to be, even though he's proven to be all the things you mentioned. Humility is fine, a good trait even, but self-loathing is annoying. I haven't given up yet, I know these are the early books too, but so far I'm not a fan.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 19:44
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:I wasn't really paying attention this morning and Diane teleported three thousand miles from the Channel to Inaccessible Island. You were paying attention just fine. O'Brian does that from time to time and just figures that nothing interesting will happen in the next three months so why bother mentioning they've passed?
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 19:54
|
|
|
Hornblower will never be as fun as Aubrey (and O'Brien is undoubtedly a more interesting writer than Forrester) but he is worth persevering with as the books do give their fair share of moments. Whilst it's true that a lot of the time you just want to shake him by the lapels and tell him to cheer up for Christ's sake, there's something about a terminally insecure character that I find somewhat endearing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:I haven't given up yet, I know these are the early books too, but so far I'm not a fan. Have you watched the Hornblower mini series? It just might give you enough of an appetite for Hornblower to get you into the books too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 20:19
|
|
|
The miniseries is pretty good. Doesn't have quite the same feel as the books, but it captures most of the essentials of Hornblower's character. One thing to remember about the Hornblower novels is that they were written over the span of 30 years and the quality is not consistent. Some of the earlier stories are too pulpy for their own good and the way Forrester bounces back and forth through the chronology does confusing things to Hornblower's character. I've only read like four of the books though and it wasn't in chronological or publishing order, so I can't really say how it all fits together. Austen Tassletine posted:Whilst it's true that a lot of the time you just want to shake him by the lapels and tell him to cheer up for Christ's sake, there's something about a terminally insecure character that I find somewhat endearing. Isn't this why we love Maturin, too? Although at least he has a sense of humor about his own inadequacies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
The miniseries is pretty good. Doesn't have quite the same feel as the books, but it captures most of the essentials of Hornblower's character. One thing to remember about the Hornblower novels is that they were written over the span of 30 years and the quality is not consistent. Some of the earlier stories are too pulpy for their own good and the way Forrester bounces back and forth through the chronology does confusing things to Hornblower's character. I've only read like four of the books though and it wasn't in chronological or publishing order, so I can't really say how it all fits together. Austen Tassletine posted:Whilst it's true that a lot of the time you just want to shake him by the lapels and tell him to cheer up for Christ's sake, there's something about a terminally insecure character that I find somewhat endearing. That kind of describes Maturin as well, especially when it comes to all the crap he puts up with from Diana (who's seriously the worst). Although at least he has a sense of humor about his own inadequacies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 21:40
|
|
|
PerilPastry posted:Have you watched the Hornblower mini series? It just might give you enough of an appetite for Hornblower to get you into the books too. I did! But Ioan Gruffudd doesn't go through all that internal monologue the book guy does. I mean I've read worse, so I'll probably go through all of them, I just don't like Hornblower all that much right now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 22:48
|
|
|
Speaking of TV series, I liked Master and Commander the movie and all, but I would kill for an HBO-style miniseries of these books.
|
|
#
?
Jul 20, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
hannibal posted:Speaking of TV series, I liked Master and Commander the movie and all, but I would kill for an HBO-style miniseries of these books. Not enough nudity for HBO to be interested.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 00:07
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Not enough nudity for HBO to be interested. Jack can go swimming every episode. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
Colonial Air Force posted:Not enough nudity for HBO to be interested. That's just O'Brien being polite: if they shot every one of Jack's escapades there'd be more nudity than in Showgirls.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 00:38
|
|
|
We know what Babbington is all about!
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 01:25
|
|
|
oldman posted:Jack can go swimming every episode. Male nudity is really more Showtime's thing, isn't it? Notahippie posted:That's just O'Brien being polite: if they shot every one of Jack's escapades there'd be more nudity than in Showgirls. There's certainly plenty of implied sex! Frankly I'd be fine with it, just so long as we get more. That movie is one of my favorites, even before I read the books. No one wants to invest the money on the Age of Sail 
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 02:07
|
|
|
PlushCow posted:We know what Babbington is all about! Aren't his missing teeth because he contracted syphilis? Colonial Air Force posted:Frankly I'd be fine with it, just so long as we get more. That movie is one of my favorites, even before I read the books. No one wants to invest the money on the Age of Sail Wolf Hall and Outlander seem to be doing well, maybe this appetite for historical epics will continue. There will probably be another attempt to put O'Brian on the screen. I feel like he's going to be read 100 years from now the same way people still read Sherlock Holmes. Raskolnikov2089 fucked around with this message at 04:44 on Jul 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 04:41
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:Aren't his missing teeth because he contracted syphilis? Don't know about his teeth (dental hygiene wasn't that great at the time to begin with - just remember Higgins), but stunted growth that a lot of navy men (including high-born) have shown is often attributed to syphilis, and Babbington isn't a giant. Although the diet low in fruit and vegetables, with regular starving periods surely didn't help.
|
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 05:49
|
|
|
Decius posted:Don't know about his teeth (dental hygiene wasn't that great at the time to begin with - just remember Higgins), but stunted growth that a lot of navy men (including high-born) have shown is often attributed to syphilis, and Babbington isn't a giant. Although the diet low in fruit and vegetables, with regular starving periods surely didn't help. I remember a specific description of him talking about his youthful appearance now much changed because he was missing teeth because of his amorous proclivities. It's somewhere at or before Treason's Harbor (just noticed it in my current re-read) Stephen talks about having cured him of the pox on several occasions. Raskolnikov2089 fucked around with this message at 06:04 on Jul 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 06:01
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 29, 2024 03:53 |
|
|
There is so much vague implication and obtuse jargon in Maturin's descriptions of people and events that I often feel like I'm missing something important that I just can't place. Sometimes I figure it out eventually, sometimes I have to wait for him to talk to Jack about it, and sometimes he gets to keep his secrets. Normally, I let the arcane medical chatter wash over me the same way I handle the more inscrutable descriptions of fouled leads and flying tops'l yards (or whatever), but sometimes I feel like I really should be looking up some of these terms he's using. I probably would have realized Jack had chronic constipation a little earlier if I'd known what "costive" meant. There's also a certain... delicacy to O'Brian's descriptions that can leave things rather ambiguous, especially when it comes to sex. It's not like I'm expecting these books to have sex scenes (the thing with Jack and the Polynesian queen caught me completely off guard, actually), but there have been a few times where I was legitimately unsure how much I was supposed to be reading into things. Part of the reason I took a break after Truelove is that I found all the tiptoeing around what was (or wasn't) going on in the middle part of the book to be particularly tiresome. I get that it was supposed to be an "open secret" kind of thing, but there just wasn't enough there there. e: remembered that some people are still reading these things. The constipation isn't a spoiler though, not if you remember what Jack eats most of the time. Duckbox fucked around with this message at 09:01 on Jul 21, 2015 |
|
#
?
Jul 21, 2015 08:42
|
|