What makes the Titanic story so enduring?
woot_whoo
Posts: 18,030 Forum Member
✭✭
I'm genuinely curious about this. I've had the bug since childhood - the story fascinates me, haunts me, intrigues me. But why? There have been many other maritime disasters - others with even greater loss of life. What is it about the Titanic tale that has made it a cultural phenomenon, from Walter Lord's book to the film of the same name; from the Nazi movie to the Stanwyck film; from SOS Titanic to the Cameron film?
There are legions of historians, amateur and professional, who dedicate their time to studying this one disaster. There are websites and discussion forums which examine everything from where certain people were at certain times to the myriad 'what ifs' to how people paid when dining in the Cafe Parisien. No other shipwreck in human history seems to have invited this much speculation, discussion and interest. No others have captured the public to the same extent - either at the time or now. There are few films or sites about the Lusitania or the Empress of Ireland, of the Britannic. What makes the story of the Titanic so magical and haunting, and will interest wane in our lifetimes?
There are legions of historians, amateur and professional, who dedicate their time to studying this one disaster. There are websites and discussion forums which examine everything from where certain people were at certain times to the myriad 'what ifs' to how people paid when dining in the Cafe Parisien. No other shipwreck in human history seems to have invited this much speculation, discussion and interest. No others have captured the public to the same extent - either at the time or now. There are few films or sites about the Lusitania or the Empress of Ireland, of the Britannic. What makes the story of the Titanic so magical and haunting, and will interest wane in our lifetimes?
0
Comments
My GGF was part of the crew and a survivor and I am a proud owner of a piece of the ships wooden railings!
None of the other ships you mentioned were declared unsinkable and then sank on their maiden voyage, nor were other ships, allegedly, managed very badly during an emergency, until recently!
The whole thing is, basically a tale of folly and arrogance from start to finish.
It was also a turning point in maritime safety regulations. Prior to the disaster the number of lifeboats a vessel was required to carry was dependant on tonnage, not the amount of passengers. Following the disaster this was soon changed.
And of course there's all the myths and legends about the sinking, the tales of heroism and bravery, all playing a major role in her legacy.
I don't know - that's why I said in the opening post, 'But why?'
I can't put my finger on what it is about this one disaster (as opposed to many others) that makes it of near-universal interest and the subject of umpteen books, websites, films, TV shows, discussions, forums, dedicated encyclopedias, etc.
If I was to hazard a guess, I'd say that the human interest factor may play a large role. Many shipping disasters happen so quickly that the individual stories stories are not well recorded. This one took nearly 3 hours to unfold, and there are dozens of heart-wrenching tales of human drama which have come down to us (often romanticised and embellished with heroes and villains). There's also the class issue - this disaster united the very poorest and the rich and famous in loss and grief. Then, I suppose, there is the high drama of the ship being the biggest of its age, and on its maiden voyage to boot! All that glamour and hope lost in a few hours. I don't know, perhaps all of these things combine in some way to make this shipwreck stand out from all others.
I'm interested in what other 'Titanoraks' find enduring about the tale, though.
True, it seems to be held up as an archetypal tale of human hubris.
Agreed, I think the personalities involved have played a huge role in the disaster's 'popularity' right from the moment she slipped beneath the waves. Almost immediately, Captain Smith was labelled a hero and stories sprang up about him saving an infant, handing it to a boat and then simply sinking beneath the icy waters. Ismay, by surviving, became a moustache-twirling villain. The Duff Gordons became rich toffs who had bribed their way onto a boat. Tales arose about third class men donning shawls and sneaking aboard lifeboats dressed as women.
I think that's very debatable. No ship her size, going at her speed, has ever hit an immovable object. A lot of documentaries (and movies) state as fact that she'd have stayed afloat had she hit it head on, but it's in no way a given. It's just as possible the force would have buckled her and thrown off her centre of gravity to such an extent that she'd have turned turtle immediately, killing everyone. As we cannot know what was lurking beneath that berg, her bottom might also have been ripped out.
Also, of course, no seaman worth his salt would have sailed directly into an obstacle when the possibility of dodging around it existed.
The Cunards were better designed, faster and safer, double hulled and bulkheads reaching the upper decks.
I seem to recall there's another ship which, famously (although not famously enough that I can recall it's name) sailed into New York with it's front ripped apart after doing exactly that.
I dunno if it's true but there's a story that the officers on watch on the Titanic did actually consider whether to ram the iceberg or try to avoid it but they were concerned that a direct hit would spill people's drinks and wake them up if they were in bed.
Again with the whole "arrogance" thing.
*EDIT*
I'm thinking of the SS Arizona, which was, apparently, on it's way back to Liverpool at the time.
Trust me , you should read up on Herbert Lightholler , incredible life story ( possible film ) and played a big part in the Titanic story.
Yep, I have done - fascinating man and led quite a life outside the Titanic disaster (Dunkirk, etc). I do recall he was one of the few to insist that the ship sank in one piece; although given his strenuous activities in icy water in the dark at the time allow me to forgive him for that mistake. On the other hand, he did say that, thanks to White Star, the Inquiries into the disaster were 'a whitewash'...
Personally I'm not a "Titanorak" but I went to the Titanic Centre in Belfast last year and enjoyed it more than I thought I would.
I can recommend this book 101 Things You Thought You Knew About the Titanic...But Didn't
I think you're thinking of the Arizona. She did indeed limp into board with a crushed hull, but she was a much smaller ship travelling at a slower speed, and obviously she hit a quite different 'berg.
Never heard the story about any consideration of ramming the 'berg. Sounds apocryphal - no seaman would sail a brand new ship directly into danger. According to the lookouts (and the drawing one of them produced), when it was spotted it was already very slightly to the right (starboard).
Oh, I agree.
I mentioned it more as an example of the way so many things about the Titanic are tales of arrogance and hubris.
In fact the survival rate of RMS Titanic's 1st class passengers was much higher than the 2nd & 3rd (steerage) class passengers respectively.
Not surprisingly, the death rate of 3rd class passengers exceeded over the other death rates of 1st & 2nd class passengers as they were the last people to realise that something was amiss in the last hour before the Titanic sank based on poor communications or a deliberate decision to withhold information by the crew.
As another poster wrote, many changes came about in safety on ships after the tragedy.
Note to the poster who wrote that folks like the image of the rich drowning. Firstly, grow up. Secondly check the facts. Proportionately more of the rich survived. It was the third class/steerage poor people who drowned.
Well there was certainly a lot of that around at the time! As well as various publications declaring that the Titanic (and other vessels before and after her) were 'designed to be practically unsinkable', Captain Smith himself is on record as saying "I will say that I cannot imagine any condition which could cause a ship to founder. I cannot conceive of any vital disaster happening to this vessel. Modern shipbuilding has gone beyond that". Not only that, but when news of the disaster was only just breaking (with false stories of it being injured but still afloat being leaked), the CEO of White Star declared that he had utter faith in the ship's unsinkability!
Note back
1. It was a joke
2. It was a joke
A whole host of 'Gilded Age' ships were declared as 'practically unsinkable' or 'as unsinkable as it is possible to be'. In fact, it was quite the in thing for new ships to be marketed in this way. However, as far as public consciousness goes, the qualifier of 'practically' is unlikely to have factored in, and belief in new vessels' unsinkability was probably very real.
Certainly, the Captain thought that modern vessels were unsinkable, and the CEO of White Star was still proclaiming it even in the hours after it had sank! :eek: