From Brian Felsenthal
During the voyage of the crew of the Essex, the sailors had absolutely no idea how far west they were off of South America. They had charts, but they were lost along with the Essex. The only pieces of navigational equipment they were able to salvage were the sextants , copies of Nathaniel Bowditch's "Navigator," and compasses. This lack of knowledge of position made the crew quite apprehensive of the surrounding isles. They were unwilling to stop at many places due to either the fear of cannibals or the possibility of island confusion.
What would you do if you were in Pollard's position? Would you stay on course for South America or head for possible supplies at the Society Islands? Would you have stayed at Henderson like Seth Weeks, William Wright, and Thomas Chappel, or left because you knew staying on the island meant death because of those other skeletons and lack of food?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
10 comments:
I was amazed when Pollard decided to change his route because of what some of the other men said. He wanted to take a stop to possibly get help at the Society Islands, yet he didn't want conflict so instead went with what everyone else said. This proved to be a very bad choice, seeing as because of it, most of the men died. I would have gone with my first instinct. He's the captain so the other men should listen to him since he (probably) knows what he's doing.
Also, floating in the middle of the ocean would totally freak me out, although the men had done it for a living. But having extremely limited supplies would make it even worse. If i were in the boat and somehow had a say in the decision, i would tell my shipmates to risk being eaten and stop at the nearest island. Because in the end, many of the men were eaten anyway.
The decision to stay on Henderson or not is a bit of a harder one. If you look at it like Chase did, every day on the island is another day you could be sailing towards the mainland. But, if you look at it like Chappel, Weeks, and Wright did, the island was someplace where they could actually stand on solid ground. It sort of, in a way, represented safety to them. We can't exactly tell which of them made the better choice because they both survived. Some of the men on the water died before they reached home, but Chase had the right mindset to make it all the way, and then some.
Personally, I was cursing Pollard for his stupidity when he changed his mind. He needed to establish his authority, for one thing. More importantly, if he'd stuck to his guns, so to speak, some of the men needn't have died. It seemed like this whole epic was one tragic mistake after another. However, we can't be too harsh on them. They did what they felt right, and it just so happened that it was wrong. It happens to the best of us, though usually in much less dire situations. Maybe they would've met with more disaster if they'd gone to the Society Islands, more men would have perished and the world would have looked upon that as the stupid decision.
Me? I would've gone to the Society Islands. The supplies were extremely limited, and the need for a restock - in both food, equipment, the whale boats, and hopefully a ship - was pressing. Without supplies, the chances of survival are slim to nil. To me, the Society Islands would have seemed like a better way to go.
It became clear during the crews' stay at Henderson that it wasn't fit to sustain multiple people for a long period of time. I understand why Wright, Chappel, and Weeks stayed: the security of land under their feet and a food supply that would last, albeit not long enough. In my opinion, it was pure luck that they survived. Had the rest of the crew died on the journey, and had the ship not got there in time, they would have died.
Personally, I would have gone with the rest of the crew. The knowledge that death was almost inevitable in the case of staying on Henderson would be, to me, unbearable. I would take the risk of an open boat with little supplies rather than staying on the island with death looming. Going on the whaleboats wouldn't be a definite death sentence. There would be a huge risk, but it'd be worth it. Also, it would be easier for me to have more occupying my mind (which would be provided on the whaleboats) then mindlessly wandering around the island. That I couldn't take.
Again, I don't think we should judge them too harshly. They were doing what they felt best in different conditions. Whose to say that we all wouldn't have done the same?
I was very amazed that Pollared decided to change his route. He had heard these "stories" of cannibalism and that they would die if they went to the society islands. I would have gone to the Society Islands. Even though the skeletons proved that I wouldnt survive and there was limited food on the island, I would still feel safer there. I think that staying on an island is better that floating around on the ocean in the middle of no where knowing that another whale could attack your boat or you could sink at any moment. The "stories" that Pollard heard are also probably rumors.
I agree with Sarah that they should have stayed at the society islands. But, if i was the only one that wanted to stay on the island, I would leave with the rest of my ship mates. Also, like sarah had said before, we cannot judge them too harshly because they only did what they thought was best.
The shpmates and the captains lived thorugh harsh and rough conditions. They (well, some) survied many storms and many days without food and water on the seas alone. I think that they should get some credit for that.
I was appalled when Captain Pollard chose one of the longest courses possible. If I were in Pollard's position I would have gone to the closest island. I would have only done this to get fresh supplies and to repair damaged equipment. It's not like they would have been eaten alive. They had guns and weapons to protect themsleves. In my opinion, it would have been better than floating in the middle of the ocean eating my friends and starving to death.
Such a provacative question that generated some very thoughtful answers. Fine work all round with responses. I am wondering...what were the Society Islands really like in the 1800s? I wonder if I --rather, one of you --can locate information on them for the wiki!
If I were in Pollard's position the decison of where to go would be very difficult for me. I would definatly decide not to go to the Marquesas because of their reputation of cannibalism and the islands of Tuamotu Archipelago also had a "dark and disturbing reputation amoung American sailors".But the decison between the Society Islands and following the coast of South America would be difficult to make.
The good thing about the Society Islands was that it was a safer option that the Marquesas and it could be reached in thirty days. The bad things about it was that it was 500 miles farther away than if they followed the South American coast and both Chase and Joy believed that it had a reputation much worse than those of the Marquesas.
The good things about going along the coast was that it would only take 2000 miles to get there and that they had enough bread and water to last them until they would get there. The bad thing was that it was a riskier plan because they didn't exactly know where they were going.
Depending on this information, and this information only, I would have picked going along the coast would be a better idea than going to the Society Islands. I haven't reached the part in the book where they reach Henderson, but I'm going to read a lot tonight.
I think that many of the decisions that Pollard made affected the crew in the long run. Instead of going further out east, like many of the other ships were doing it would have been a much safer idea to stay somewhat near land. If the crew had done this then they wouldn't have been hit by the whale and put in the situation that they were. The long route that Pollard also decided to take increased the time that the men were out there and. Many of the men on the boats probably chose not to argue with him because he was the captain, therefore he knew what he was doing.
If I was in Pollard's position, I would probably head for possible supplies at the Society Islands. I wouldn't be able to stay in a good state of mind with the little amount of supplies that the men had. Whenever I'm in a bad situation, I like to keep moving. The motion keeps my mind off what's going on and puts it onto moving from where I am to somewhere else. I couldn't have stayed at Henderson because it would be like waiting for death. Knowing that death was coming soon would makes me lose my mind.
I would have hated to be in the middle of the ocean so I understand why Wright, Chappel, and Weeks wanted to be on the land.
Pollard was in a very hard situation. There was of course fear of cannibals and such, but to be stranded in the middle of the ocean with no water, and soon to be at that point, no food he probably should have gone to the island. There was no way, at that point, to predict what was going to happen.
I agree with Susan, floating in the middle of the ocean would really scare. I can't imagine looking out and having only a rough idea of where I am with limited supplied left.
Personally, I think they should have just stopped at the island and taken the risk but Pollard, I guess, thought he knew what he was doing.
You write very well.
Post a Comment