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

[Mark Kohut]

We know O' Brian is alluded to in M & D. 

Sent from my iPad

> On Jan 24, 2015, at 7:17 PM, jochen stremmel <jstremmel at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> A-and let's not forget that the author of the best historical novels in your language before Hilary Mantel's, Patrick O'Brian, wrote two novels about George Anson's mission – The Golden Ocean and The Unknown Shore – before he, well, embarked on the finest series of seafarer novels that I know (not saying much, sure), with two heroes, a British captain and an Irish-Catalan physician and natural scientist who can communicate quite freely with French colleagues despite the war, and I have the impression that it is all very well researched. The author wrote a biography about Sir Joseph Banks as well. 
> 
> A-and any boy who read the Hornblower novels of C.S. Forester knows that captains in the Royal navy had to pay for their own victuals.
> 
> 
> 
> 2015-01-24 20:01 GMT+01:00 <kelber at mindspring.com>:
>> This whole sub-section, from p. 31 ["He wants whah'?"] to p. 34 ["Perhaps there is?" he suggests, as gently as possible.] is rife with conjecture and unreliable narration. Cherrycoke recounts or conjectures about Mason's conjectures about what went on at a meeting at which he was not present. Various names are referenced: Mead, White, Stephens, Lord Anson [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Anson,_1st_Baron_Anson], adding up to a "Them," maybe? The sequence sets up a backdrop for the paranoia that consumes M and D after the attack. Meetings are being held, letters sent, by persons they have no contact with. What other decisions are being made by unseen parties?
>> 
>> Laura
>> 
>> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> >From: Mark Kohut <mark.kohut at gmail.com>
>> >Sent: Jan 24, 2015 9:48 AM
>> >To: James Robertson <james at themutedposthorn.com>
>> >Cc: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
>> >Subject: Re: M & D deep duck: section 4 -- orders not to sail. Puzzled.
>> >
>> >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
> 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20150124/f48091a6/attachment.html>