http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php?title=Talk:Philip_Broke&feed=atom&action=historyTalk:Philip Broke - Revision history2024-03-29T06:04:23ZRevision history for this page on the wikiMediaWiki 1.15.1http://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php?title=Talk:Philip_Broke&diff=11443&oldid=prevLadyShelley: reply2009-04-14T00:34:11Z<p>reply</p>
<table style="background-color: white; color:black;">
<col class='diff-marker' />
<col class='diff-content' />
<col class='diff-marker' />
<col class='diff-content' />
<tr valign='top'>
<td colspan='2' style="background-color: white; color:black;">← Older revision</td>
<td colspan='2' style="background-color: white; color:black;">Revision as of 00:34, 14 April 2009</td>
</tr>
<tr><td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 5:</td>
<td colspan="2" class="diff-lineno">Line 5:</td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background: #eee; color:black; font-size: smaller;"><div>On its face this reflects Broke's character, but given that O'Brian purposefully chooses to make the contrast and present it as the changing of era's, the question is whether there is a deeper significance or if the author simply wishes to mark this period as when the Royal Navy changed to its modern form ?</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background: #eee; color:black; font-size: smaller;"><div>On its face this reflects Broke's character, but given that O'Brian purposefully chooses to make the contrast and present it as the changing of era's, the question is whether there is a deeper significance or if the author simply wishes to mark this period as when the Royal Navy changed to its modern form ?</div></td></tr>
<tr><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background: #eee; color:black; font-size: smaller;"><div>--[[User:Sic Transit|Sic Transit]] 18:25, 11 April 2009 (BST)</div></td><td class='diff-marker'> </td><td style="background: #eee; color:black; font-size: smaller;"><div>--[[User:Sic Transit|Sic Transit]] 18:25, 11 April 2009 (BST)</div></td></tr>
<tr><td colspan="2"> </td><td class='diff-marker'>+</td><td style="background: #cfc; color:black; font-size: smaller;"><div><ins style="color: red; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;">:For this sort of analysis, you might want to see what the library papers have to say; if anything. This is one of those times when primary resources are best. I think this could shape to be a pretty interesting article on its own: How POB made the transition from the free rolling times to of Jack to the more staid, contained, gentleman represented by Broke. --[[User:LadyShelley|LadyShelley]] 01:34, 14 April 2009 (BST)</ins></div></td></tr>
<!-- diff generator: internal 2024-03-29 06:04:23 -->
</table>LadyShelleyhttp://wiki.hmssurprise.org/phase3/index.php?title=Talk:Philip_Broke&diff=11442&oldid=prevSic Transit: question of analysis2009-04-11T17:25:41Z<p>question of analysis</p>
<p><b>New page</b></p><div>'''Aubrey & Broke; contrasting eras:'''<br />
It is clear that O'Brian wishes to draw a distinction between Aubrey and Broke. He clearly places Broke as of a somber, more constrained modern age. Aside from the noted references there are several less direct. At one point when examining the guns with their flint-locks, Aubrey suggests that slow-match should also be present as a back up. Aubrey comments " Besides, it is the old way; and I like the old ways as well as new." <br />
There are several references to Broke's earnestness and lack of ostentation; on commenting on the lack of decoration Broke remarks "we always were a very unostentatious ship, you know..." and when asked "Mayn't we have three ensigns, sir,like she has? No, said Broke. We have always been an unassuming ship." <br />
<br />
On its face this reflects Broke's character, but given that O'Brian purposefully chooses to make the contrast and present it as the changing of era's, the question is whether there is a deeper significance or if the author simply wishes to mark this period as when the Royal Navy changed to its modern form ?<br />
--[[User:Sic Transit|Sic Transit]] 18:25, 11 April 2009 (BST)</div>Sic Transit