Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009

Re: Resolving Alleged Chronological Discrepancies In L'Ile Mysterieuse

From: thomas mccormick <tom_amity~at~hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 08 Jun 2006 23:37:18 +0000
To: jvf~at~Gilead.org.il

Dear Sid, Harold and Ralf:

Thank you for your thoughts (and ditto any other vernephiles who may care to
express themselves.

Ralf and Harold bring, you correctly bring forth reasons why, in the real
world, Verne might seek to "rewrite" fictional "history". Speaking in terms
of your frame of reference, i.e. "the real world", you're absolutely right.

My exercise was to find consistency in terms of the fictional world, in
which an inner contradiction is generally supposed (as in the website
statement "Don't try to resolve the discrepacies [between the two novels] as
it is impossible"). I think this supposition is wrong, and that any
perceived discrepancies can be resolved in terms of the fictional history
itself, i.e. whether or not we suspend disbelief in the real world and
assume the reality of the world Verne has created in The Mysterious Island.

In other words, assuming the reality of this alternate world, there are no
chronological puzzles that cannot be solved by obeying the directive in the
"Editorial Note", instructing us to differentiate what are, in terms of the
fictional world of the novel, "the real dates" (T2), from "the false dates"
(those given in 20,000 Leagues and extrapolated via T1). The two timelines
are clearly distinguished from each other by the manner in which they cite
their respective chronologies.

Sid, I agree that the problem of "true" and "false dates" exists also in
Ayrton's narrative. However, it is a much easier matter to obey Verne's
directive to ignore "false dates" in the novel Captain Grant's Children
("Editorial Note" in Part !!, chapter XVII) than to obey the similar
directive in the"Editor's Note" to Part III, chapter XVI regarding "false
notes" in 20,000 Leagues. This is because of "false dates" given in, or
extrapolable from, Twenty Thousand Leagues, and still deliberately inserted
in Nemo's narrative--even as Verne's "Note" warns that these dates (M1) are
"false". This problem does not intrude into Ayrton's narrative.

I agree emphatically with Ralf on a further point. French flies do indeed
like it hot. In this connection, it is a strange fact that there was a time
when I could not have repeated this statement without having my patriotism
questioned. Some of my compatriots would have it that the entities in
question ought to be denominated as freedom flies, in retaliation against
the French government's presumption to disagree with its opposite number in
the U.S. (Le Vengeur, as Nemo put it, is a fine name.) Thankfully, that
storm, like the one that blew Smith & Co. to Lincoln Island, seems to have
passed.

Tom McCormick


>Reply-To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
>To: jvf~at~Gilead.org.il
>Subject: Re: Resolving Alleged Chronological Discrepancies In L'Ile
>Mysterieuse
>Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2006 13:27:03 EDT
>
>Let us not forget the other chronological discrepancy in The Mysterious
>Island. If MI is the sequel to 20TL it is also the sequel to Captain
>Grant's
>Children. In Grant, Ayrton is abandoned on Tabor Island in March 1865 (in
>MI he
>is abandoned on Tabor Island in March 1855) yet he is rescued twelve years
>later by Pencroff et al in October 1866.
>Sid Kravitz

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Received on Fri 09 Jun 2006 - 02:37:32 IDT

JV.Gilead.org.il
Copyright © Zvi Har’El
$Date: 2009/02/01 22:36:11 $$