|
there's repeated references to Jack being a "thoroughgoing Tory" which was the monarchist conservative party at the time. the whigs were your classic, capital L, Liberals.
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 02:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 19:05 |
|
|
Genghis Cohen posted:I'm not sure you can class the British fighting against the French in the Napoleonic Wars as a left/right power struggle, after the initial period immediately after the French Revolution, say 1789-1792.t. Modern conservatism arose out of a reaction to the French revolution, so yeah you can very accurately classify it that way. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflections_on_the_Revolution_in_France
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 07:32
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:Modern conservatism arose out of a reaction to the French revolution, so yeah you can very accurately classify it that way. You think that applies after Napoleon takes over? He's not spreading revolutions across Europe, it's just conquest of other countries. He installs his siblings as monarchs and himself as emperor.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 10:41
|
|
|
He betrayed the revolution sure, and put an end to it's excesses, and but he was it's natural end result. Burke even predicted the rise of a military strongman. In a lot of areas he was progressive and brought about a lot of radical change. I think a few times Stephen had to defend himself to other radicals for his unwillingness to support Napoleon, despite all the other good Napoleon was seen as doing. Raskolnikov2089 fucked around with this message at 16:47 on Jul 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 16:38
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:In a lot of areas he was progressive and brought about a lot of radical change. I think a few times Stephen had to defend himself to other radicals for his unwillingness to support Napoleon, despite all the other good Napoleon was seen as doing. I don't know a great deal about the internal administration of his empire, but isn't it fair to say that Napoleon may have done some good for people in France, but a hell of a lot of bad for the people in Spain and other countries?
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 18:02
|
|
|
It's a mixed bag, he was a total "ends justify the means" guy, as most utopians are. Any foreign royal who stood in the way of his expansive vision was replaced by a family member. But his vision was for a united Europe, and he was the initial driver of a lot of unification efforts in Italy and Poland. In many ways he was extremely progressive for his time, promoting near universal public education (and the education of women), religious freedom, protection for jews, a complete rewrite of whole governing codes to fit his modern vision (I think a lot of his Napoleonic code is still in effect today in France) and a large emphasis on meritocracy. These types of radical changes are antithetical to conservative thought (at least if you're not a bumper sticker conservative), which believes that there's a lot of danger with trying to replace longstanding institutions that work well enough, with rational thought. I don't buy the reductionist view Burke was opposed to the Enlightenment, but he was certainly suspicious of it. I need to spend time reading more biographies on Napoleon though, the man was an absolutely brilliant polymath. There was almost no aspect of life that he didn't try to improve. Raskolnikov2089 fucked around with this message at 19:01 on Jul 1, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 18:57
|
|
|
A lot of the Napoleonic Code is still in effect from Spain to Austria.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 19:04
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:I need to spend time reading more biographies on Napoleon though, the man was an absolutely brilliant polymath. There was almost no aspect of life that he didn't try to improve. Unless you were a former slave in a French colony freed by the Revolution, in which case his reversal of that law and re-establishment of slavery was a pretty big gently caress you.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 19:21
|
|
|
‘Napoleon-good guy or bad guy?’ is a question people have been asking since about 1792 and I don’t think it’s been definitely answered yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 19:26
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:Unless you were a former slave in a French colony freed by the Revolution, in which case his reversal of that law and re-establishment of slavery was a pretty big gently caress you. I really recommend https://www.amazon.com/Black-Count-Revolution-Betrayal-Cristo/dp/0307382478. Biography of the Black Count, General Alexander Dumas . Napoleon: not a fan
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
Kaiser Schnitzel posted:‘Napoleon-good guy or bad guy?’ is a question people have been asking since about 1792 and I don’t think it’s been definitely answered yet. He was definitely a weird dude.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 20:26
|
|
|
Kaiser Schnitzel posted:‘Napoleon-good guy or bad guy?’ is a question people have been asking since about 1792 and I don’t think it’s been definitely answered yet. If he'd stopped at the Russian border and decided to consolidate a continental European Union and eventually made peace with Britain, he coulda been a contendah for George Washington of Europe instead of a megalomaniacal bum, which is what he was, let's face it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 20:55
|
|
|
Mr. Mambold posted:If he'd stopped at the Russian border and decided to consolidate a continental European Union and eventually made peace with Britain, he coulda been a contendah for George Washington of Europe instead of a megalomaniacal bum, which is what he was, let's face it. Why would the Brits have made peace with him? And Napoleon's consolidation wasn't working very well in Spain.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 21:02
|
|
|
ChubbyChecker posted:Why would the Brits have made peace with him? And Napoleon's consolidation wasn't working very well in Spain. Who knows, it's all speculative, ain't it. He didn't have a realistic end-game, and from all accounts he was a mediocre chess player. At the end of the day, the British are pragmatic. They and France were the two biggest empires, Great Britain was bleeding out from the war worse than France from what I've read; the East India Company was being raided. Britain was also already a constitutional monarchy. They'd made a peace with the U.S. and quickly resumed trade relations. Britain and France had duked it out for 700 years. Eventually, it ends one way or another. If Napoleon doesn't invade Russia, he's got way more than enough army and resources to keep insurrections in Spain to a minimum. Maybe he recognizes Catalonia as a separate nation? He recognizes at some point that semi-autonomy for Prussia, Italy, etc. is far better than keeping standing armies everywhere. None of which were my original point.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 21:26
|
|
|
Raskolnikov2089 posted:It's a mixed bag, he was a total "ends justify the means" guy, as most utopians are. Any foreign royal who stood in the way of his expansive vision was replaced by a family member. Very interesting, thank you. I only knew about the schoolkids' level detail on the Napoleonic Code. I can see his achievements were as outsized as his atrocities.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2021 22:34
|
|
|
Mr. Mambold posted:Who knows, it's all speculative, ain't it. He didn't have a realistic end-game, and from all accounts he was a mediocre chess player. Nappy sending more troops to Spain wouldn't have helped much, because he already had huge troubles supplying the troops that were already there. If he had just sent his massive Russian invasion force to Spain, they would just have starved there. Britain didn't lose much in the short term from losing the 13 colonies, because they they could reap most of the benefits from trading, and they weren't an existential threat, unlike Napoleonic France. The most important colonies were the sugar producing Caribbean ones. You are quite correct that Napoleon didn't have a realistic end goal, and he would just have kept on gambling with invasions until he lost.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 09:47
|
|
|
Also colonization was the main game at that point, Napoleon wouldn't have been happy just holding most of Europe and leaving the brits free to rule the waves, there was too much wealth out there to be plundered. Though I guess if you control Spain you also control most of South America.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 16:15
|
|
|
thekeeshman posted:Also colonization was the main game at that point, Napoleon wouldn't have been happy just holding most of Europe and leaving the brits free to rule the waves, there was too much wealth out there to be plundered. Though I guess if you control Spain you also control most of South America.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 19:48
|
|
|
IMO Napoleon shouldn't have lost Trafalgar if he wanted to win. If he'd won Trafalgar he could have continued rolling up the coast of Western Europe collecting French squadrons on the Atlantic coast until they finally arrived in the Netherlands and had a powerful covering force of 50+ battleships for an invasion of England. Probably shouldn't have lost any chance of contesting the sea right after the peace.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 21:01
|
|
|
Shoulda let catalan be independent and then maturin wouldn't have been working for sir joseph banks and thwarted him at every turn. Aubrey probably would have died too from a heart attack without his good friend advising daily climbs when he got too fat and there goes british dominance of the seas. Pretty big mistake when you think about it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 22:09
|
|
|
Just have to win more battles and also like strategic positions and so on. Very easy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 22:43
|
|
|
Dear Napoleon, you would win more if you lost less.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 22:52
|
|
|
Mr. Mambold posted:If he'd stopped at the Russian border and decided to consolidate a continental European Union and eventually made peace with Britain, he coulda been a contendah for George Washington of Europe instead of a megalomaniacal bum, which is what he was, let's face it. George Washington believed in things like 'elections' though Edit: ill concede he would have won if he had battleships though. Even predreadnoughts.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2021 23:22
|
|
|
 I just noticed there's a Russian attack submarine tied up behind the Surprise.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2021 02:31
|
|
|
Actually that’s the Cacafuego.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2021 02:50
|
|
|
The San Diego Maritime Museum is great and everyone should go at least once. Aside from the Surprise they’ve got 5-6 other cool ships and some rotating exhibits, last time I was there it was the history of naval tattoos.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2021 03:15
|
|
|
Arglebargle III posted:The film is more about 19th century Dudes Rocking than any particular political perspective. The conflict is remote enough in history that most people probably don't have an opinion on Napoleon or his politics. It doesn't shy away from presenting the poor living conditions in the royal navy although it does downplay the brutal discipline. I mean it does have Nagle being flogged for disrespecting Hollom But then Jack in the books always did prefer not to use the whip when possible*, contrasted with a number of references to other, less happy ships. So if the brutality of corporal punishment in the British navy gets downplayed, that's on O'Brian for writing his protagonist as less abusive than many of his colleagues. And I don't suppose I can blame him for that *Of course, he does flog sometimes, but without remembering specifics it always seemed like it was in circumstances where he would be seen as shockingly lax by his colleagues and the admiralty to not flog.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2021 19:20
|
|
|
Phy posted:I mean it does have Nagle being flogged for disrespecting Hollom I've always appreciated how one of the times you see him absolutely lose his poo poo and order a flogging immediately was watching a sullen sailor fail to (salute? "make his obedience"? anyway, do something to acknowledge an officer) while passing a disliked officer on a narrow gangway. It's a reminder of how rigid and absolute some aspects of life aboard ship was and how there were some things that everybody was okay with a little bit of flexibility around and how some seemingly innocent actions were fundamentally Not Done.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2021 19:32
|
|
|
It's also that Nagle is an able seaman and a known malcontent, so there's no excusing his actions. Which Jack tells him at punishment. I do think the movie Hollum is a different character than the book Hollum. In the movie Hollum is more sympathetic although still shown to be weak and incompetent.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2021 19:43
|
|
|
Phy posted:I mean it does have Nagle being flogged for disrespecting Hollom It's not always that he consciously thinks that he'd be seen as shockingly lax by his colleagues, he just does it because it's part of the system that he was raised in -- some offenses are just ones that rate a flogging. I think there are a few times where he does it because he doesn't want the hands to see him as weak, or jockeying for popularity. And I just finished a re-read of Post-Captain, where his lovely first lieutenant Parker orders a lot of undeserved floggings, but as far as Jack sees it he has to back up his officers and can't reduce the punishments.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2021 19:10
|
|
|
Sax Solo posted:Like, the movie's all right, it has some good things! It has a kind of "Rah rah our boys at sea" tone to the ending which is kind of terrible and a painful clash with POB's cynicism. Coming out in 2003 with the buildup to war in Iraq there was a bit of contextual stink to it that probably can't be felt now. Otherwise though the choice of HOW to end it is very good. I think Weir originally wanted the Acheron to be an American frigate, but the studio was concerned about audiences being confused.
|
|
#
?
Jul 13, 2021 17:39
|
|
|
I just started reading the nonfiction book Six Frigates, which is about the early days of the American navy, and during a description of Thomas Jefferson's extended visit to France and his communications back home, there was this:quote:In a letter of June 1786, Madison opened with a paragraph on political developments in Virginia and then continued: “For want of something better to fill the remainder of my paper, I will now add the result of my examination two days ago of another of our minor quadrupeds. I mean a Weasel.” The description of the animal and its internal organs filled eight long paragraphs. Thirty-eight different anatomical measurements were recorded in an appended table. Maturin's got some competition  Bubbacub posted:I think Weir originally wanted the Acheron to be an American frigate, but the studio was concerned about audiences being confused. They could have just had Mel Gibson in a brief cameo role as captain of the American frigate and everything would have made sense. Kylaer fucked around with this message at 14:35 on Jul 16, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 14:31
|
|
|
But then you don't get those hails of "Eeengleesh whaelaor!"
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 16:54
|
|
|
Bubbacub posted:I think Weir originally wanted the Acheron to be an American frigate, but the studio was concerned about audiences being confused. Much as Jack was when the War of 1812 was declared, the audience just wouldn't be comfortable with the Brits fighting the Americans. The slippery Frogs are a much more 'foreign' enemy. Fighting them comes natural, like.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2021 21:29
|
|
|
Notahippie posted:I've always appreciated how one of the times you see him absolutely lose his poo poo and order a flogging immediately was watching a sullen sailor fail to (salute? "make his obedience"? anyway, do something to acknowledge an officer) while passing a disliked officer on a narrow gangway. It's a reminder of how rigid and absolute some aspects of life aboard ship was and how there were some things that everybody was okay with a little bit of flexibility around and how some seemingly innocent actions were fundamentally Not Done. I'm pretty sure Jack's reasoning here is that while some offenses can be handled with a lighter touch, anything that even whiffs of a degradation of Authority has to be put down immediately, or else risk things degrading into a mutiny later on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 24, 2021 22:07
|
|
|
It's very funny/good that when Jack meets his black son Jack's main concern (beyond his wife knowing about it) is that he's Catholic.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 17:03
|
|
|
And then in later books, he hears how far his son has risen in the church and he can't be prouder.
|
|
#
?
Jul 27, 2021 17:17
|
|
|
I remember reading one thing O'Brian gets wrong was the universal admiration for French-built ships. French ships were indeed admired for their design qualities. However British captains also considered them lightly-built. They needed much more time in dock than their English counterparts. French builders didn't consider long voyages between refits an important criterion and didn't build ships to endure them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 7, 2021 02:21
|
|
|
Finished Far Side of the World. Holy hell the "Jonah" subplot is so much more grim than what was in the movie. I was generally pretty surprised how little the movie took from this book. I knew about the antagonists changing from American to French, of course, but really the book is a totally different animal aside from a few elements and characters. I will say that the 1812a-1812b timescale is really starting to mess with me. When I think of events from Fortune of War or Surgeon's Mate they feel like they happened to a Stephen or a Jack of ten years earlier instead of just a few months earlier. At least O'Brian was candid enough in his author's note to say he would have done the chronology totally differently if he knew ahead of time how much he'd enjoy writing the series.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 21:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 19:05 |
|
|
As far as I'm concerned the whole thing is basically in dream time. I mean, the only time I think he actually mentions their ages is in the beginning of Master and Commander, where he implies they're both in their mid-twenties, but after that I don't think he mentions actual dates or even years very often, so I really have no idea how old they are at the end of the series, other than that they're both starting to feel old.
|
|
#
?
Sep 13, 2021 22:01
|
|