Author Topic: Dead Wake by Erik Larson - October Book Club Online (Read 68748 times)

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #360 on:** October 26, 2015, 10:28:06 PM »

The Book Club Online is the oldest book club on the Internet, begun in 1996, open to everyone. We offer cordial discussions of one book a month, 24/7 and enjoy the company of readers from all over the world. Everyone is welcome.

October Book Club Online

Dead Wake
by Erik Larson

"Few tales in history are more haunting, more tangled with investigatory mazes or more fraught with toxic secrets than that of the final voyage of the Lusitania, one of the colossal tragedies of maritime history. It’s the other Titanic, the story of a mighty ship sunk not by the grandeur of nature but by the grimness of man." - ~ New York Times.

DISCUSSION SCHEDULE:

Week 1: to "Lusitania a Cavalcade of Passengers" p.89
Week 2: to "Lusitania: Helpful Young Ladies: p.191
Week 3: to "All Points Rumor p. 279
Week 4: to end p.353

For Your Consideration:

1. which of the passenger's experiences during the sinking made the most impression on you?

2. Some passengers reported a calm, almost idyllic experience while waiting for rescue. have you ever experienced anything like that in a situation of danger?

3. How much do you believe Schweiger was affected by what he had done? How much was Turner?

4. What were the political reasons for blaming Turner? which decisions of his did they question? Do you agree?

5. What do you think of Larson's explanation for the second explosion? Was it what sank the Lusitania?

6. Were you surprised at the timing of the US entering the war? Why has the entry become linked to the sinking of the Lusitania? Did Wilson deserve blame for being so slow?

7. Now that we've finished the book, overall what are the strengths and weaknesses of Larson's account. If you've read other accounts, have they added significantly to his?

"It took more persistance than I thought, but I finally found it: dead wake is "the trail of a fading disturbance in the water"- PATH

Discussion Leaders: Ella & JoanK

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #361 on:** October 26, 2015, 10:36:56 PM »

"the coroner's jury issued its finding: that the submarine's officers and crew and the emperor of Germany had committed 'willful and wholesale murder.'"

At the conclusion of Lord Mersey's trial "Mersey laid blame entirely on the U-boat commander."

These two juries Larson wrote about blamed the disaster entirely upon Germany's use of submarine warfare.

Mersey wrote that Turner "exercised his judgment for the best......judgment of a skilled and experienced man.....and he ought not, in my opinion, to be blamed."

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #362 on:** October 26, 2015, 10:48:04 PM »

INTERESTING YOUTUBE - America's decision to enter WWI - I remember streetcars from when I was a little girl, but I'm not quite old enough to remember women dressing like this:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11I4q9E_qM0

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #363 on:** October 26, 2015, 11:11:06 PM »

I lost respect for Churchill back when we read Those Angry Days - here he was ensconced in a bedroom at the White House with his whiskey, cigars and all night meetings, as a guest of this nation. He does not use this invitation to simply convince Roosevelt the wisdom of helping England during WWII but he, in secret had a British group plant publicly story after story convincing the American people they should enter the war in Europe - Yes, he was right but to do this in secret with his own people under the nose of Roosevelt!!?! - I lost all respect for the man so I was not a bit surprised to see him deflect blame on Turner -

I lump Churchill in with those who represent "that every nation will be satisfied and not desire more protection, power, wealth, land" England wanted control of the Dardanelles owned by Turkey. Britain did not want Russian ships in the Mediterranean. The Mediterranean was part of Britain's most important trade route to India. Churchill wanted more power just as later during WWII Churchill representing England wanted to be considered the most powerful European Allie or they would not have been so upset over Montgomery taking second place to Eisenhower -

So much for his feeling the horror of so many children who perished with this quote attributed to Churchill after he received the news they say he almost danced in glee, this - “The poor babies who perished in the ocean struck a blow at German power more deadly than could have been achieved by the sacrifice of a hundred thousand fighting men.”

Sure the response from England was a tit for tat or else Germany would have had it all - Power, Wealth, Land and Prestige but like Germany took on Britain as a pawn to their real desire for Belgian, so Churchill wanted an alliance with the US that would preserve and gave him more power and give England an assured route to India through the Dardanelles. His secretly leaving for France shows him for a suspicious wormy character that from what we read, Turner was 10 times more a man of integrity - so sure they had to blame it on the torpedoes so there could be a just war - Wouldn't it be interesting to learn who gave the order to abandon the Lusitania to sail dangerous waters unaccompanied.

bellamarie · « **Reply #364 on:** October 27, 2015, 10:26:03 AM »

Barb,

Quote

Wouldn't it be interesting to learn who gave the order to abandon the Lusitania to sail dangerous waters unaccompanied.

Scapegoats are always a part of keeping the government secrets. In every war/attack I suppose we have a lingering desire to know WHO did what. I still want to know WHO is the first person that came up with blaming the video for the attacks on Benghazi. We know it was a lie because now we see Hillary told Chelsea in an email that very night it was a planned attack and she told the PM of Egypt the next morning she knew it was a planned attack by al qaeda, yet Hillary, Susan Rice, Jay Carney and Obama went in front of Americans and pushed the lie. But, WHO initiated it in the beginning? Will we ever find out? Like Captain Turner was the fall guy for the Lusitania, the filmmaker was the fall guy for Benghazi. I am glad Turner was exonerated. The filmmaker is still in jail. History does have a way of repeating itself, presidents not taking responsibility for their inaction.

PatH · « **Reply #365 on:** October 27, 2015, 10:54:30 AM »

We might eventually find out whodunit in the case of Lusitania. One of the internet sources I found said there are still British documents that haven't been de-classified. Maybe the answer is in there. It might not be a person, though, it could be a committee.

Jonathan · « **Reply #366 on:** October 27, 2015, 03:52:29 PM »

I stop for a minute everytime I come in to the discussion to admire the Lusitania at the pier in New York. 'The Only Way To Cross' is the title of a book I have, with the sister ship Mauretania on the cover. Little did the passengers know that they would get caught in the crosshairs of history, be a part of the cause celebre that brought the U.S.A. on to the world stage.

What a fascinationg link to President Wilson's role in the drama, Ella, as he agonized his way from 'too proud to fight' to 'let's make the world safe for democracy.'

And then there is the man who saved civilization, Winston Churchill. For fifty years he served his country, steering the ship of state through stormy seas. It does seem strange that he wanted Captain Turner to take the blame for the Lusitania's cruel fate. But as First Lord of the Admiralty it must have seemed too humiliationg to admit that Britain no longer ruled the waves. Not even the waters around the Isles were safe. If the Admiralty had so much information of the whereabouts of the submarines, why didn't they go after them.

Barb finds Churchill 'a suspicious wormy character.' You're not alone. In the books of many he's the captain that steered a crooked course. In a book I have before me I read that Christopher Hitchens (a professional contrarian Brit) 'writing in an American publication, Atlantic Monthly, in April 2002 when he accused Churchill of being ruthless, boorish, manipulative, 'incapacitated by alcohol', myopic, and wrong about almost everything except the Nazis.,,and makes the claim that Churchill was responsible for deliberately putting the American liner Lusitania at risk in 1915 in order to bring the United States into the Great War....'

And it gets better, or worse.

Hardly a year goes by without a new book accusing Churchill of luring Rudolf Hess to Scotland or having had prior knowledge of the bombing of Pearl Harbor or another such rank absurdity. He has been accused of engineering the Wall Street Crash of 1929; a writer in the Philadelphia Inquirer has argued that if Churchill 'had been a little wiser in 1911, or 1911, neither World War II, nor the Korean , Vietnam nor Persian Gulf wars would have happened, nor the drug explosion, nor the vast American deficit; some writers still maintain that he allowed the city of Coventry to be destroyed rather than risk revealing that Britain had cracked the Enigma code....' Hitler and Churchill: Secrets of Leadership, Andrew Roberts.

...but this is where we came in...sorry for the detour

JoanK · « **Reply #367 on:** October 27, 2015, 05:09:24 PM »

Interesting video. we knew all the pieces, but it's good to see them put together. Wilson was a very different man from Churchill.

Do we still believe in his vision of America as a special place, a beacon of democracy?

JoanK · « **Reply #368 on:** October 27, 2015, 05:10:55 PM »

And the contrast between Wilson and Teddy Roosevelt as men is fascinating!

JoanP · « **Reply #369 on:** October 27, 2015, 07:18:31 PM »

Whew...we're really getting into it, aren't we? I think we're ready for the declassification of those remaining British documents, PatH 100 years from the disaster seems to be a logical time to declassify if they ever intend to do it.

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #370 on:** October 28, 2015, 10:47:08 AM »

There will probably be another book when the British documents are declassified; perhaps we will find a few answers? Thanks, Pat!

"A beacon of democracy" - JoanK. Yes, I still think so, but are we trying to democratize the Middle East; I hope not.

Jonathan mentioned Christopher Hitchens; I always liked hearing him talk even if I didn't agree with his ideas. I did a bit of searching his name on the web and found this quote which I think is apt as we ponder whether Churchill did or did not prevent the Luisitania from being attacked:

""What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" - Christopher Hitchens

Yes, "Whew!" - JoanP

bellamarie · « **Reply #371 on:** October 28, 2015, 11:08:02 AM »

JoanK.,

Quote

Do we still believe in his vision of America as a special place, a beacon of democracy?

Yes, indeed I do still believe in this. We have faltered over the last decade, but we still are the beacon of democracy, and a very special place, afterall, aren't we the place everyone wants to come to for these very reasons.

I have to say I was a bit impressed with Wilson's “Americanism and the Foreign Born.” (Too Proud to Fight) speech. It gave me a better view of the man/president, since Larson has given us a slanted view of him in this story.

JoanK · « **Reply #372 on:** October 28, 2015, 03:28:33 PM »

Was anyone else surprised that we didn't go to war until TWO YEARS AFTER the Lusitania sank? Am I the only one that thought that sinking was the impetus that made us join the war?

Jonathan · « **Reply #373 on:** October 28, 2015, 05:50:31 PM »

'Do we still believe in his vision of America as a special place, a beacon of democracy?'

'Was anyone else surprised that we didn't go to war until TWO YEARS AFTER the Lusitania sank? Am I the only one that thought that sinking was the impetus that made us join the war?'

For two years the president worked at giving peace a chance. Others clamoured for war. The Lusitania sinking got immediate reactions, in church sermons and college lectures. But it took the Zimmerman telegram to convince the president that the country was in danger. The 'too proud to fight' speech, reflecting profound thoughts on purpose and policy and 'the great ideals which made America the hope of the world, is such an amazing statement that it seems to have something of a Gettysburg Address about it.

But those clever guys in Room 4o, like Blinker Hall, finally pulled it off with the telegram.

'Through a bit of skullduggery, Hall managed to acquire a copy of the telegram as it had been received in Mexico...using conventional espionage techniques.

I don't believe it. It sounds 'too good' to be true. But the president was convinced.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #374 on:** October 28, 2015, 05:54:28 PM »

Do you think it may have been that we had at the time more German immigrants than any other nationality and we Know Wilson was concerned that he could get the nation behind the war knowing it could split the nation.

There were more sinking's before we acted - also, it was revealed that the Lusitania was carrying about 173 tons of war munitions for Britain, which gave Germany its justification. Although Americans died it was not enough to convince the vast number of Germans in the US that Germany acted without provocation. The US protested the action, and Germany apologized however, in November of that same year a U-boat sunk an Italian liner without warning, killing more than 270 people, including more than 25 Americans.

According to some history sites it was only after the sinking of the Italian liner after Germany said it would stop unrestricted submarine attacks that US public opinion turned against Germany.

It was in January of 1917, that Germany announced it would resume unrestricted warfare in war-zone waters and three days later, we broke diplomatic relations with Germany, and just hours after that the American ship Housatonic was sunk by a German U-boat.

Congress passed a $250 million arms appropriations bill intended to make us ready for war and in March, Germany sunk four more U.S. merchant ships.

In April President Wilson appears before Congress and called for a declaration of war against Germany. Two days later the Senate voted, and two days after the Senate vote the House endorsed the declaration of war.

JoanK · « **Reply #375 on:** October 28, 2015, 06:46:03 PM »

JONATHAN: Here is the text of Wilson's speech about making the world safe for democracy. Sorry, It's hard to read: i couldn't find a better one:

http://historymatters.gmu.edu/d/4943

JoanK · « **Reply #376 on:** October 28, 2015, 06:47:58 PM »

BARB: interesting time line. So the L sinking was the beginning of a process that eventually led to war.

Did you notice that Larson doesn't believe that the second explosion was due to munitions. what do you all think of that?

JoanP · « **Reply #377 on:** October 28, 2015, 07:36:08 PM »

JoanK - was just about to ask about that second explosion, believed at the time by many to have been caused by a second torpedo.

Larson never seems to accept this idea...but Larson is writing from the benefit of hindsight. He writes:

"What most likely caused the second event was the rupture of its main steam line, carrying steam under extreme pressure. This was Turner's theory from the beginning."

What I'm trying to understand - what would it have meant if TWO torpedoes had in fact taken the ship down? Why was this important in the investigation? Would proof that there had been two torpedos have quieted talk that the Lusitania was carrying munitions that exploded when the first torpedo hit. Anything else? We're there other reasons?

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #378 on:** October 28, 2015, 07:39:17 PM »

I don't know, JOANK, I don't remember that. Any one?

Just interested in what JONATHAN has posted; would Wilson have gone to war without that telegram - that does seem to be the icing on the cake, so to speak. However, if you go to Larson's SOURCES on page 358-359 and look at all his research into Wilson, etc., you begin to believe the author.

Wilson was a peacemaker and probably truly hated the prospect of having to declare a war - what president would want to do such a thing - well, I think of Teddy Roosevelt, perhaps. He was all for this war, sent his sons with big ideas of heroism. And then lost his youngest and favorite as I remember. We should do a discussion about Teddy, such an interesting fellow.

And no doubt what BARBARA has posted in reference to America's unwillingness to go to war:

."Do you think it may have been that we had at the time more German immigrants than any other nationality and we Know Wilson was concerned that he could get the nation behind the war knowing it could split the nation.

No doubt that is also true, Barb!

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #379 on:** October 28, 2015, 07:42:31 PM »

Good question, JOANP. Something to think about. We were posting at the same time. Off to watch the debate tonight.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #380 on:** October 28, 2015, 07:46:13 PM »

My guess is 'intent' - The German Uboat captain said he did not realize till after the fact that it was the Lusitania - a second torpedo would have kept him longer on the periscope - more time to ascertain the ship - just a guess. Also two torpedoes may have appeared like overkill to the public that from everything we read on sites about the sinking the large German American population was still giving doubt to outright blaming Germany.

I think we have to remember England was not our close buddy as today - the Revolution and the War of 1812 were less time in history to WWI than we are to the Civil War today and there is still folks re-fighting the Civil War with definite opinions that sometimes get in the way - and so the idea we as a nation would automatically believe and support Britain I think is reaching - we were angry at Germany but I would guess we were suspicious of Britain and they were not off the hook - so again, two torpedoes would make Germany out the bad guy for sure between the two.

bellamarie · « **Reply #381 on:** October 29, 2015, 12:54:10 PM »

Barb,

Quote

My guess is 'intent' - The German Uboat captain said he did not realize till after the fact that it was the Lusitania - a second torpedo would have kept him longer on the periscope - more time to ascertain the ship - just a guess.

Everything else I have read and even posted earlier is that you could NOT mistake the Lusitania for any other ship because she had such distinctive features to her, and that Schweiger full well knew before he ordered the torpedo it was indeed the Lusitania. I have found a few discrepancies in Larson's book compared to other authors and articles. Larson gives little or no credence to the munitions on the ship, and they being the possible cause for the second explosion, where my article I posted prior, showing the digital reenactment by the expert shows it is very likely the munitions factored into it.

Barb,

Quote

it was revealed that the Lusitania was carrying about 173 tons of war munitions for Britain, which gave Germany its justification.

How would the Germans have known the munitions were on board a passenger ship beforehand? Unless they had some information or some way of having possible espionage attaining that knowledge, yet we were not given it in this story. I posted the original manifest of the Lusitania, but Germany would not have had access to that prior to the sinking. It would give the lawyers, and Germany argument of justification AFTER the sinking, but their actions for sinking a passenger ship before knowing this would not be justifiable.

Lots of unanswered questions, speculations and theories to ponder.

JoanK · « **Reply #382 on:** October 29, 2015, 04:40:22 PM »

This is a better mystery story than most of the mysteries I read.

JOANP: : "What I'm trying to understand - what would it have meant if TWO torpedoes had in fact taken the ship down?"

In addition to the reasons given above, the Lusitania sank awfully quickly and easily for only one torpedo. The ship owners would definitely want to know why; if it were some flaw in ship design or management, they might be held liable (indeed, they were sued by survivors) and would worry about her sister ships. Again if the second explosion was due to some explanation like Larson's, they would need to worry about it. A second torpedo would get them off the hook.

JoanK · « **Reply #383 on:** October 29, 2015, 04:49:19 PM »

BARB: "I think we have to remember England was not our close buddy as today - the Revolution and the War of 1812 were less time in history to WWI ..."

By pure coincidence, Amazon delivered yesterday a mystery I had pre-ordered involving Churchill in WWII. He is crossing the ocean {They don't say if in a Cunard liner) to visit President Roosevelt, "dodging U-boats". Eleanor is fussing, wondering if they should remove mementoes of the damage the British had done in the War of 1812, and decides no, let them see what they did.

This is fiction, but still.

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #384 on:** October 29, 2015, 07:25:08 PM »

Oh, this has been so much fun - I hope all of you have enjoyed it as much as I have. I think it is about time we evaluated the book.

Is Larson a good author of history - of historical events? What made this book a bestseller? Are nonfiction books often bestsellers? Can you think of many?

Are you ordinarily a non-fiction reader? What other books of history have you enjoyed recently? Do you want to read more about this era in America?

Why is it that so many books are written about war? Do they glorify it?

What are your thoughts about the book? The discussion? What other books of history would you suggest would make a good discussion?

Ella Gibbons · « **Reply #385 on:** October 29, 2015, 07:31:20 PM »

One last thing - I always get the chills when I hear it! JONATHAN, stand up!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-GvkyKEYRnM

JoanK · « **Reply #386 on:** October 29, 2015, 11:45:04 PM »

Jonathan would you rather stand up for up "O Canada"?

Yes, it's time for round-up questions, although we hate for this discussion to end.

What is the most interesting thing you learned? the most surprising?

What do you think of Larson's presentation? Would you read another of his books?

bellamarie · « **Reply #387 on:** October 30, 2015, 09:48:41 AM »

JoanK., What do you think of Larson's presentation? Would you read another of his books?

I felt Larson's writing style was easy to read and captivating. Even though you knew the history of the Lusitania, he wrote this story with anticipation and surprise leading us through the human emotions as the passengers sighted the torpedo, how they reacted, and how some were able to survive and help others.

Ella, Are you ordinarily a non-fiction reader?

I have become more of a non-fiction reader in the past few years. I have a difficult time reading fiction, although I force myself to.

The thing that most surprised me in this story, is the fact the passengers boarded this ship knowing the newspapers were warning the dangers of sailing in wartime waters.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #388 on:** October 30, 2015, 10:24:56 AM »

No torpedoes but water is falling in buckets - not sheets but buckets - tornadoes, roads are raging rivers, lightening is over, rain that was expected to be 3 inches then an hour later 5 inches and now since 7 this morning, it is now 9:30 and we have had so far 10 inches and more still coming. All low water bridges are under water and in some areas the water is up to a normal height bridge - so much water on the runway at the airport it is moving planes sitting on the tamarack and now those in the airport are being taken to areas with the least windows - tornado is now a watch - gotta get off here -

ginny · « **Reply #389 on:** October 30, 2015, 10:35:31 AM »

Barbara, that sounds dangerous! Hope you are OK.

Are you ordinarily a non-fiction reader?

I like fiction, but it's getting harder and harder to find topics in fiction that I can relate to. That may be age, or it may be the immaturity of the authors, I don't know. I know that my tolerance for "coming of age" books is gone. So I read more so called "Non Fiction," but in IT I am finding that the way the author chooses to present material can alter history considerably.

It's always been that way. You have two conflicting eye witness reports in 2015, you choose to report A when B might actually be what happened, and then you choose "facts" to support your prose. Just because it's written anywhere, including the Internet, does not make it true.

I am finding non fiction to be as about "fiction" as fiction is, sometimes, in some ways.

I like the way Larson writes, and I plan to read his Devil in White City which I have not read.

I've loved the discussion and the varying points of view and the information I have gotten from it.

Super job, Ella, Joan K, and Fellow Commentators!

Jonathan · « **Reply #390 on:** October 30, 2015, 04:00:51 PM »

'- gotta get off here - ' Let's hope that Barb has her life-preserver on properly What an alarming post. Washed overboard, looking for torpedoes and threatened by tornadoes!!

Thanks for the link, Ella. Yes, I'm on my feet. Even without the sound...I can hear her singing...what is it? Wish me luck as you wave me goodbye? When the lights go on again? There will always be an England?

What's the title of the mystery you're reading Joan? I think I would like to read that one. By the way, Churchill came across on the maiden voyage of the 37,000 ton battleship Duke of York. I got that from One Christmas In Washington, an historical account of WSC in the White House conferring with FDR. Just after Pearl Harbor.

'Would Wilson have gone to war without the telegram? Teddy Roosevelt was all for the war - such an interesting fellow.'

What a great question, Ella. I was convinced that he would not have taken the country into war. The 'too proud to fight' speech had me convinced that he was a man of peace. Out of curiousity I consulted Edmund Morris' TR bio, the third volume: Colonel Roosevelt, TR's life after the White House. I've had to change my mind. Wilson soon realized the speech had been a political gaffe. But it had been written under great stress, as he himself admits, while courting Ellen. So it may well have been written with the thought: What will Ellen think of it, of me? More importantly, Wilson was already looking to the future, and a second term. Once he had that...it was off to war.

The book has made me curious about a lot of things. Like submarine warfare. And the subsequent search for other, new weapons of war, and, of course, U.S. involvement in the wars that have afflicted the world for the last hundred years. I've just had a book given to me with the grandest reccommendations. Craig Nelson's Rocket Men: The Epic Story of the First Men on the Moon. Not the least interesting thing about it, is the great help of German scientists and rocket engineers in the achievment.

JoanK · « **Reply #391 on:** October 30, 2015, 04:22:20 PM »

JONATHAN: the book is "Mrs. Roosevelt's Confidante", the latest in a series by Susan Macneal about a woman mathematician who starts out as Winston Churchill's secretary and winds up a spy. Here is the series (scroll down):

http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/m/susan-elia-macneal/

Click on the title to get a summary.

bellamarie · « **Reply #392 on:** October 30, 2015, 05:11:23 PM »

Barb, how awful I pray you and everyone is safe. Please let us know. How frightening.

Jonathan, So it may well have been written with the thought: What will Ellen think of it, of me? More importantly, Wilson was already looking to the future, and a second term. Once he had that...it was off to war.

Interesting..... I have to think Wilson really was against the war, and wanted to keep the peace. I read much of his speech was written from him being a Christian man and took much from scripture.

JoanK · « **Reply #393 on:** October 30, 2015, 05:14:37 PM »

Barbara: be safe. our thoughts are with you.

BarbStAubrey · « **Reply #394 on:** October 30, 2015, 05:19:37 PM »

Dead wake here is an uppercut from the hammer of Thor sent the raging rivers and creeks rocketing end over end, over their banks rising to record highs, while tornadoes touched down, hail hit the carnage of flooded buildings and rain continues to fall from the dark sky - various amounts of rain in the wide spread area - we have had just over 9inches since midnight - it was if we were in the wake of a sinking great ship like the Lusitania. More rain and more rain right through the night - I was out clearing my channel across the front of my house and all is well on my island of safety.

To the book - I think my learning was along the lines of the bits that supported the story - what it was that both Germany and Britain wanted that they had foremost as their goal as they built their responses to this war.

I remember learning as a kid that Wilson wanted peace and the loss of his league of nations after the war was a crushing blow for him - I am trying to remember but I think I was in either the 5th or 6th grade when there was this blockbuster period movie about the life of Wilson - I did not attend with my class since I knew my family was planning on seeing it together - we did and I had to write a paper on the movie since I did not go to the special matinée to see it with the class.

OH look - found the movie - get the football outfits these boys wear - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Xh0IRgr-lI

nlhome · « **Reply #395 on:** October 30, 2015, 06:28:33 PM »

I found the book very interesting, as well as the discussion. But I moved on to In the Garden of Beasts, which I have not read, and started that. I don't read a lot of nonfiction but right now, reading about the past is helpful in tolerating the present. I also have not found any good fiction books that appeal.

bellamarie · « **Reply #396 on:** October 30, 2015, 10:55:03 PM »

I want to thank Ella and JoanK., for moderating Dead Wake. Thank you for granting me permission to come aboard the mighty Lusitania. Yet again, a book I would never have picked up and read on my own. I have enjoyed the voyage, without the sinking of our own discussion.

The few things I take away from reading this book..... history continues to repeat itself regardless of how many times we have tragedies to teach us differently. There will always be war as long as we have nations and leaders with egos, power and differences. There will always be cover ups for mistakes made, and blame casted on others so those who are actually at fault never take accountability or responsibility. Nothing is really any different today in our governments than it was as far back as 1914, just different leaders, and different allies or enemies. And lastly, while I will continue to travel and enjoy different parts of the world, I will always know where I am going and if there is clear and present danger in the area I am going to be traveling to. I will not let fear rule my life, but warnings are meant to be heeded, rather than ignored. We can't do anything about the unknown or unpredictable, but we can certainly make good choices with information we are given.

It was great sailing with all of the crew and passengers here at Senior Learn. Our ship has reached its harbor, docked, and all passengers must begin heading to the gangplank to disembark. It's on to Sarajevo for me to meet a cellist!

JoanK · « **Reply #397 on:** October 31, 2015, 04:00:17 PM »

BARB: so glad you're all right. Yes, the book fleshes out the little bit of history I remember too. I'll make time later to watch the movie: the opening music and names of the actors brought back the 40s vividly. The movie came out during WWII, so it will be interesting to see how the Germans and Wilson's attempts to avoid war with them are portrayed.

JoanK · « **Reply #398 on:** October 31, 2015, 04:05:19 PM »

NLHOME: glad you enjoyed it. Yes, I am reading more non-fiction now too.

BELLAMARIE: " history continues to repeat itself regardless of how many times we have tragedies to teach us differently."
Yes, and were going on to read about a different tragedy in "The cellist of Sarajevo(sp?) where people cant avoid danger.

JoanP · « **Reply #399 on:** November 01, 2015, 11:46:37 AM »

Erik Larson did so much research and included so many details and then wove it into such a readable tale, you could almost forget it was non-fiction- or the other way around. I can remember how some of us were losing patience at his inclusion of so many details.
It became clear by the end, though that he was describing the items collected over the years.

I've forgotten where I read of the museum where these items are displayed. Remember rhe photographs they took of the unidentified corpses? I wonder if the photos are included in this museum? Perhaps too gruesome, though Larson clearly had access to them. These photos he described remain in my mind. The expressions on the faces of the dead...the young woman with sand in her hair - eyes shut tight, mouth as if screaming. I remember wishing at the time they could have been made more presentable for their relatives...but of course that wasn't possible.

I'm with the rest of you in preferring non-fiction over fiction these days. Do you think this is age related?

Thank you JoanK and Ella - you make quite a remarkable team the way you compliment one another in addressing the issues and our posts! Hurrah to both of you!

Barbara, relieved to hear that you are all right and pray the clean-up is progressing.

News:

Author Topic: Dead Wake by Erik Larson - October Book Club Online (Read 68748 times)