Quote:
Originally Posted by issybird
Actually, I kinda agree with you.  A Night to Remember, while important and groundbreaking when it came out, is just a chestnut now. Certainly it can't advance our understanding of what happened and in fact some of it's been disproved. I loved it as an adolescent and I have zero interest in revisiting it now. Good read, but ultimately kind of schlocky. IMHO, of course.
On the other hand, new treatments of historical incidents, of which we have several from which to choose, I find endlessly interesting and illuminating. Just because something happened in the past, doesn't mean that it's not relevant today; again, several choices fall under this rubric. |
I would have to agree with Issybird that Lord's book is now somewhat outdated. On the other hand it might be interesting to revisit it in light of what has been uncovered since--something he did himself in
The Night Lives On (1976}. Lord in ANTR had the enormous advantage of being able to interview many of the survivors of the disaster first-hand. But he did fail to use sufficiently other important sources such as the American Senate Hearings in which witnesses saw the ship break in two--evidence completely ignored because Lightoller's flawed testimony was given precedence simply because he was an officer. There is also the unsolved mystery of the third ship supported by excellent testimony of some of the survivors.
It is also possible to explore the cultural impact of the loss of
Titanic. It has become mythic in its significance. Lord does examine this somewhat in the book but there is much more to be explored.
But, in fact, because we have only recently passed the centenary, we have been bombarded with information and theories--some quite bizarre-- (one holds that it was the
Olympic that sank}. I can understand why some might feel that we need a rest from the topic.
I did support ANTR but I can see the attractiveness of Issybird's preference that we look at "new treatments of historical incidents".