Mark M Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 I don't really know what will happen, Calvert probably will or has fallen for Granger. But Granger with his resilliant streek can destroy Calvert so to speak. Calvert seems to be putting alot on his navey career....same with Granger......like personally wouldn't a backup be ok for Granger to plan for his future?? like being so young on a ship of his own, what the hight of his power? king? Comander of the Navy next to the king?? Calvert made an interesting propistion to Granger that i'm currious to see how it comes about, Granger as he is very intelegant should heed this advice and use it. Otherwise he'll be Commador in no time.... as for his libo....SETTLE IT DOWN haha
Mark Arbour Posted August 16, 2009 Author Posted August 16, 2009 I don't really know what will happen, Calvert probably will or has fallen for Granger. But Granger with his resilliant streek can destroy Calvert so to speak. Calvert seems to be putting alot on his navey career....same with Granger......like personally wouldn't a backup be ok for Granger to plan for his future?? like being so young on a ship of his own, what the hight of his power? king? Comander of the Navy next to the king?? Calvert made an interesting propistion to Granger that i'm currious to see how it comes about, Granger as he is very intelegant should heed this advice and use it. Otherwise he'll be Commador in no time.... as for his libo....SETTLE IT DOWN haha Both men have chosen the navy as their career, so that will be their focus. They won't let up on that, they won't change direction unless they have to. If they decided that the Royal Navy was not for them, they'd have entirely different choices. For Granger, he'd probably end up in politics, probably in Parliament. These were the days prior to Parliamentary reform, when the rotton boroughs were still around. For Calvert, he could maybe do the same thing, but his future would be less sure. He doesn't have the power and influence behind him. Maybe he would decide to become a merchant sailor, or maybe a farmer. Where could Granger go? Pretty damn high, but not King. You have to be born into that role, at least in England. He could feasibly become the First Lord of the Admiralty, head of the navy, or maybe retire and go into politics later in life.
Mark M Posted August 16, 2009 Posted August 16, 2009 (edited) Both men have chosen the navy as their career, so that will be their focus. They won't let up on that, they won't change direction unless they have to. If they decided that the Royal Navy was not for them, they'd have entirely different choices. For Granger, he'd probably end up in politics, probably in Parliament. These were the days prior to Parliamentary reform, when the rotton boroughs were still around. For Calvert, he could maybe do the same thing, but his future would be less sure. He doesn't have the power and influence behind him. Maybe he would decide to become a merchant sailor, or maybe a farmer. Where could Granger go? Pretty damn high, but not King. You have to be born into that role, at least in England. He could feasibly become the First Lord of the Admiralty, head of the navy, or maybe retire and go into politics later in life. Interesting! i assume this storyline will continue much like Chronicals of an Academic Preditor....buy the way i'm suffering from COAAP!!Its a deadly Disease! Eventually i'll die. So far No cure has been Made. Anyway i mean continue because there's a long way for Granger to go, but Frankly if he just Rockets to the top....whats the point of the story? there has to be a bigger purpose then what i'm forshadowing. Granger must have something big coming up....Calvert or Travers... Politics would be ok, but to write about would be horribly complicating. I hate the fact that Granger really has no say in his orders, just does what he's told, i wouldn't hate you if a dispute on orders game around.....like Promoting his brother to governor....what if he's taken a "Hitler" Stance and has taken over the colony forging Good Reports....Stealing money from the british themselves....now that....would be something! Anyway i'm just Babbling and Day dreaming of what could happen! What ever does happen i'll be Excited with Nontheless!! Edited August 16, 2009 by Mark M 1
paya Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 Great chapter! Full of action! Both in the bed and on the sea... I think... George picked up the right solution of his dilemma.
Enric Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 ch5: I guess it is the old question of polygamy.... But, of course, men by nature generally are polygamists, or at least serial monogamists which would amount to almost the same. 1
Tiger Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 We have to realize that Granger is in a difficult position. He still loves Travers, and he always will, but he can't be with him for the foreseeable future. Calvert is a breath of fresh air for Granger. He does not, however, see it as a relationship that's likely to last, but he loves Calvert anyway. The real trouble could start when he sees Travers again. I think given how long it will be and their current situations, it could be an awkward meeting indeed.
Enric Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 We have to realize that Granger is in a difficult position. He still loves Travers, and he always will, but he can't be with him for the foreseeable future. this really should not be so impossible to overcome. Although it is rare, still. Two guys who were at the rank of being captains of their ships, should in some scenario however be possible to be close each other.... Let's see: one of easier: their ships could be sent to the same place, parts of the same squadron or whatever. Then, the guys *could* spend pretty much time together.... one of uneasy: two captains for one big and exceptional ship. Some plausible reason why a ship would need a commander of some part of crew (Travers) and a captain over him Granger)... Such as, a big ship of line, with exceptional weaponry - travers could get the commission to 'captain' the new and experimental weaponry, while Granger gets to captain the basic ship... a special arrangement: George is made post and gets to be captain, but he is assigned as envoy and advisor to a foreign ruler who is at naval war, while Travers gets the task to captain the said envoy's base ship. This is actually somewhat plausible: high-born aristocrats -even if they held a military commission- were put to diplomatic tasks all the time. A grunt (like Travers) is unlikely to get such, but the well-pedigreed Georgie is more than likely. And such was precisely because foreign monarchs tended to feel insulted if some *parvenu* was foisted upon them, but a man with noble princes in their pedigree were palatable... A foreign place is not getting convinced by merots usually, they rather take a look on basis of how it reflects their own status... one of the nicest situations: the two ships are sent together for some task, for a long time, and pretty apart from the main navies themselves. Guess two times whether these two captains wouuld find all sorts of reasons daily to have negotiations and such with each other... any other ideas how they could spend more of their days and nights together, while still doing their fulfilling careers ?? 1
Enric Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 (edited) let me guess what happens with the Spanish treasure: Granger is wise enough, to require provisions of good-quality food and other stuff, in Tenerife, before he actually executes the real return of that valuable metals pile. And, he also gets -even after provisions received- to keep some percentage of those gold and such as salvager's share. that's the optimistic scenario. and; pessimistic one - if Granger is not wise, but only honorable: after they have had lots of unlucky experiences in sea regarding that treasury (it takes too much space particularly now that they have plenty of people too, is risky and harmful in bad weather which they happen to face, and some skurks try to pilfer some from its storeroom), and after the rescued spanish sailors and military have eaten them out of food, and caused some harm, they land to Tenerife; where Georgie too honorably returns immediately all the spanish treasury to a bunch of spanish officials who probably embezzle a lot of it to their own pockets, [George is even too nice and foregoes the salvager's fees and portion] and then they face adversary provisioning types, pretty similar as in Portuguese islands, requiring over-payment of mostly rotten stuff... ------ btw, map about locations of Madeira and Canarians.... Canary Islands (which include Tenerife) is the bunch of islands in the focal area of the map; and, as far as I gather, madeira is that lone place clearly north from those. http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4b/Localizaci%C3%B3n_de_Canarias.png ------ btw, always when some French and some Spanish are rescued to the English ship, there SHOULD be a couple of good-looking sailors from them to join the crew of Granger's ship [not returning to their own country], - in those days, still a number of foreigners were among navies of a nation....and crews were somewhat of a mixed ethnical composition [heck, there might even be Scots among these now... ]. they just need an offer thet won't refuse. Such as, a nice English sailor for a bunkmate.... Edited August 18, 2009 by Enric
Conner Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 Yes, indeed, this chapter had everything! And here I thought that a trip to India and back would be a trifle boring. Personally, I don't give up my bedroom to anybody. I can be talked into sharing...even though I never attended kindergarten. However, I do understand Granger's reasoning. Enric - interesting analysis of what's to come of the Spanish treasure. The "fantasy" scenario that pops into my head is to dump the Spanish overboard and head for Tahiti where Granger and Calvert start up a slave trade business.
Tiger Posted August 17, 2009 Posted August 17, 2009 I think it would be more plausible for Travers to be an admiral and for Granger to be a captain of one the ships in his fleet.
Mark Arbour Posted August 18, 2009 Author Posted August 18, 2009 one of uneasy: two captains for one big and exceptional ship. Some plausible reason why a ship would need a commander of some part of crew (Travers) and a captain over him Granger)... Such as, a big ship of line, with exceptional weaponry - travers could get the commission to 'captain' the new and experimental weaponry, while Granger gets to captain the basic ship... a special arrangement: George is made post and gets to be captain, but he is assigned as envoy and advisor to a foreign ruler who is at naval war, while Travers gets the task to captain the said envoy's base ship. This is actually somewhat plausible: high-born aristocrats -even if they held a military commission- were put to diplomatic tasks all the time. A grunt (like Travers) is unlikely to get such, but the well-pedigreed Georgie is more than likely. And such was precisely because foreign monarchs tended to feel insulted if some *parvenu* was foisted upon them, but a man with noble princes in their pedigree were palatable... A foreign place is not getting convinced by merots usually, they rather take a look on basis of how it reflects their own status... one of the nicest situations: the two ships are sent together for some task, for a long time, and pretty apart from the main navies themselves. Guess two times whether these two captains wouuld find all sorts of reasons daily to have negotiations and such with each other... any other ideas how they could spend more of their days and nights together, while still doing their fulfilling careers ?? Two captains on one ship isn't really feasible, but the other two ideas are quite possible. Naval officers were sometimes tasked as diplomats or to take on special assignments, especially, as noted, if they were aristocrats. Sir Sidney Smith is a good example. Being posted to the same fleet works, as we've already seen off Toulon. btw, always when some French and some Spanish are rescued to the English ship, there SHOULD be a couple of good-looking sailors from them to join the crew of Granger's ship [not returning to their own country], - in those days, still a number of foreigners were among navies of a nation....and crews were somewhat of a mixed ethnical composition [heck, there might even be Scots among these now... ]. they just need an offer thet won't refuse. Such as, a nice English sailor for a bunkmate.... So very true! In fact, you'll see this later on in the story. The "fantasy" scenario that pops into my head is to dump the Spanish overboard and head for Tahiti where Granger and Calvert start up a slave trade business. No slave trade in Tahiti; they're a long way away. But where they are now, near Tenerife, is near the primary nexus of the trade.
Mark Arbour Posted August 18, 2009 Author Posted August 18, 2009 I think it would be more plausible for Travers to be an admiral and for Granger to be a captain of one the ships in his fleet. That's true, although that'a a long way's off. Promotion to admiral is based on seniority, and Travers has just been posted.
Conner Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 No slave trade in Tahiti; they're a long way away. But where they are now, near Tenerife, is near the primary nexus of the trade. Back off, Mark! It's my fantasy! Anything's possible.
Tiger Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 That's true, although that'a a long way's off. Promotion to admiral is based on seniority, and Travers has just been posted. Well, maybe the current admirals and all the more senior captains die.
Mark Arbour Posted August 18, 2009 Author Posted August 18, 2009 Well, maybe the current admirals and all the more senior captains die. That's why advancement was so much more rapid in wartime. The Captain had the most hazardous position on the whole ship. During combat, he was expected to stand still and be like a rock, stoic and courageous as his ship went into battle and the guns thundered about him. Admirals were expected to do the same. The death rate among captains was higher than any other rank on board a Royal Navy ship in battle.
Enric Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) That's why advancement was so much more rapid in wartime. The Captain had the most hazardous position on the whole ship. During combat, he was expected to stand still and be like a rock, stoic and courageous as his ship went into battle and the guns thundered about him. Admirals were expected to do the same. The death rate among captains was higher than any other rank on board a Royal Navy ship in battle. in modern (land) warfare, such as WWII, the death rate renownedly was highest among the army's young ensigns - those young men who just completed their reserve officer training and were posted to their first assignment on the front, to lead infantrymen in trences. A not-statistically-confirmed joke assesses that it was within half a minute when they were usually shot down after they -for the first time in their lives- emerged from the trench in head of their platoons.... Seemingly all other officers and men had a somewhat longer predicted span of life there - and the odds improved in some correlation with front-line experience. ------ if it's true how you assessed the role of captain, then I find certain similarities with the position of the Emperor in the Centauri republic .... wasn't it a certain Londo Mollari who once posited that to be proclaimed as emperor, was equivalent of declaring one as target head.... Edited August 18, 2009 by Enric
Enric Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 (edited) .... if they were aristocrats. Sir Sidney Smith is a good example. I gather Sidney Smith was not really a high-born aristocrat, instead rather only some sort of originally-modest-born celebrity of his epoch. Surely an intriguing character, with odd life and adventures already from his youth, but his birth, that really wasn't such a noble nor high... The name 'smith' should actually be a clue enough... I cannot imagine that yet in the 1700s, anyone surnamed Smith actually could be from a real aristocratic family. Edited August 18, 2009 by Enric
Mark Arbour Posted August 18, 2009 Author Posted August 18, 2009 I gather Sidney Smith was not really a high-born aristocrat, instead rather only some sort of originally-modest-born celebrity of his epoch. Surely an intriguing character, with odd life and adventures already from his youth, but his birth, that really wasn't such a noble nor high... The bname 'smith' should actually be a clue enough... I cannot imagine that yet in the 1700s, anyone surnamed Smith actually could be from a real aristocratic family. That's true. Here's the Wiki on him: Sidney Smith As Wiki notes, he was from a naval/military family.
Mark M Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 Uh so High tech into the depth of the research for this story. But the minor Details are moreso Ignored.(my ownly Critic) Anyway i'm Pumped for the Next Chapter....By the way the development in my COAP Disease is worsening...I finaly started puking Flem....My nose is stuffed also and my Sore Throat is lessening..a little. Tomorrow a Cough will probably develop. then....Either i'll have the COAP Cure...Or i'll worsen into HIV and Hep A,B,C and Craps...and Herpies...and who knows...SWINE FLU?!??! AHH!! MAYBE SARS!??!? my death is imminate
Tiger Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 That's why advancement was so much more rapid in wartime. The Captain had the most hazardous position on the whole ship. During combat, he was expected to stand still and be like a rock, stoic and courageous as his ship went into battle and the guns thundered about him. Admirals were expected to do the same. The death rate among captains was higher than any other rank on board a Royal Navy ship in battle. It must have been a scary job. I hope that Granger and Travers somehow survive, but the chances are slim. However, I don't see Granger dying at least. I'd be mad at you for killing off Travers...
Enric Posted August 18, 2009 Posted August 18, 2009 speaking about impossibilities in terms of 'dramatic necessity', I think we can trust that Mark will not ever kill George Granger nor John Travers. right, Mark ? 1
Mark Arbour Posted August 18, 2009 Author Posted August 18, 2009 speaking about impossibilities in terms of 'dramatic necessity', I think we can trust that Mark will not ever kill George Granger nor John Travers. right, Mark ? Well, never say never. I will say this. Every time I think of killing of a major character, one name constantly floats into my mind: Jeff Hayes.
Enric Posted August 19, 2009 Posted August 19, 2009 ch6: surprising. so much decency, on part of dons...... amazing. Saint Helena in a map: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/LocationSaintHelena.png http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c7/Ascension_Island_Location2.jpg so, it is not only a few days, but.... 1
Enric Posted August 19, 2009 Posted August 19, 2009 (edited) *sharpens his claws* do I see some catfights coming up ?? Edited August 19, 2009 by Enric 1
Recommended Posts