M & D deep duck: section 4 -- orders not to sail. Puzzled.

[Mark Kohut]

Right.
Thank You.

On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:46 AM, jochen stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com> wrote:
> that's not P, sourcing the term for us, but the Reverend doing the same for
> his audience, preventing unduly merriment ...
>
> 2015-01-24 16:32 GMT+01:00 Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>:
>>
>> p. 36.....the vessel is a Jackass Frigate...."jackass, a nautical term".
>> a jackass is a Hawse--bag, a ship wherein its holes are stuffed.......
>>
>> why did Pynchon source the term "Jackass" for us?....so unlike him
>> who just uses his jargon and specialty words and lets us get them
>> ourselves.
>>
>> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > The Vessel had a Reputation for Nerve (courage).....fearless in
>> > the battle at Beauport, "her Glory assured". She has done her duty in
>> > the service
>> > of a miracle in that year of miracles, 1759......
>> >
>> > Year 1759 (MDCCLIX) was a common year starting on Monday (link will
>> > display the full calendar) of the Gregorian calendar and a common year
>> > starting on Friday of the 11-day slower Julian calendar). In Great
>> > Britain, this year was known as the Annus Mirabilis because of British
>> > victories in the Seven Years' War.
>> >
>> > On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 10:15 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> > wrote:
>> >> p.35 Notice how Capt Smith's 'scruffy Sixth Rate' is perceived by the
>> >> Cap'n: ...."and if Glories there be, glorious light....'from a
>> >> Dream"...
>> >> a Light in which all Pain and failure, all fear, are bleach'd away.."
>> >>
>> >> Wha Tha all about?
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, Jan 24, 2015 at 9:48 AM, Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> >> wrote:
>> >>> Before this analysis, I simply assumed the orders had come somewhere
>> >>> in the spaces of the text.
>> >>> Now, I am inevitably reminded of the Orders to the Chums, of They,
>> >>> etc.
>> >>>
>> >>> The happy Captain is in the pocket of the Royal Society.
>> >>>
>> >>> p.41 "They knew the French had Bencoolen,---what else did they know?
>> >>> Thah's what I'd like to know"---[Dixon]
>> >>>
>> >>> On Fri, Jan 23, 2015 at 7:49 PM, James Robertson
>> >>> <james at themutedposthorn.com> wrote:
>> >>>> I am a little puzzled by this passage:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On the eighth of December the Captain has an Express from the
>> >>>> Admiralty,
>> >>>> ordering him not to sail. "Furthermore," he informs Mason & Dixon,
>> >>>> "Bencoolen is in the hands of the French. I see no mention of any
>> >>>> plans to
>> >>>> re-take the place soon. I am sorry."
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "I knew it...?" Dixon walking away shaking his head.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "We may still make the Cape of Good Hope in time," says Capt. Smith
>> >>>> "That'll
>> >>>> likely be our destination, if and when they cut the orders."
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Without any further explanation the Seahorse proceeds down the
>> >>>> Channel
>> >>>> towards its bloody encounter with the l'Grand. But why? Captain Smith
>> >>>> has
>> >>>> orders from the Admiralty, which is responsible for command of the
>> >>>> Navy, not
>> >>>> to set sail. And as we have seen in the proceeding matter of the
>> >>>> hundred
>> >>>> pounds for expenses the Captain has "no wish to offend" "the Great
>> >>>> Circumnavigator" George Anson, the then First Lord of the Admiralty.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Does this mean the orders not to sail should be read as "do not sail
>> >>>> to
>> >>>> Bencoolen"? This makes sense as it has been taken by the French, but
>> >>>> "furthermore" suggests Bencoolen is an additional reason not to sail
>> >>>> not the
>> >>>> primary one. Is the Admiralty aware of the danger posed by the
>> >>>> L'Grand?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Who is the "they" Captain Smith is referring to when he talks about
>> >>>> cutting
>> >>>> orders? If it's the Admiralty, then why would they order the captain
>> >>>> not to
>> >>>> sail and then not cut orders. Surely the two are one and the same. If
>> >>>> it is
>> >>>> the Royal Society then this raises other questions.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Judging by the threatning letter the Royal Society send Mason and
>> >>>> Dixon in
>> >>>> reply to their letter from Plymouth, it is they whom the captain is
>> >>>> referring to. So why then would he follow their orders over those of
>> >>>> the
>> >>>> Admiralty not to sail?
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "Happen," Dixon contributes in turn, "we were never meant at all to
>> >>>> go to
>> >>>> Bencoolen,-- someone needed a couple of Martyrs, and we inconviently
>> >>>> surviv'd?"
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Dixon's suspicions about the motives of the Society (on page 44)
>> >>>> offer
>> >>>> another glimpse of an explanation hinted at by captain Smith earlier.
>> >>>> That
>> >>>> Mason & Dixon are not the only ones sent out to observe the Transit
>> >>>> of
>> >>>> Venus.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> "No one else is going there to observe," Mason "Odd, isn't it? You
>> >>>> think
>> >>>> there'd be a Team from somewhere."
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Capt. Smith look away, as if embarrass'd. "Perhaps there is?" he
>> >>>> suggests,
>> >>>> as gently as possible.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Of course this suggestion is absolutely correct, Maskelyne has also
>> >>>> been
>> >>>> sent out by the Society to observe the Transit from St. Helena. But
>> >>>> it is
>> >>>> his mission that fails not theirs. Why the captain should know about
>> >>>> this,
>> >>>> almost to the point of embarrsement, is unclear. But certainly Mason
>> >>>> & Dixon
>> >>>> are being kept in the dark.
>> >>>>
>> >>>> --
>> >>>> James J. Robertson
>> >>>> @jamesjrobertson
>> >>>> james at themutedposthorn.com
>> >>>> themutedposthorn.com
>> >>>>
>> -
>> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>
>
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l