Jules Verne Forum

<jvf@Gilead.org.il>

JanFebMarAprMayJunJulAugSepOctNovDec 19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009

Re: Chronology--Who cares?

From: thomas mccormick <tom_amity~at~hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 02:01:01 +0000
To: jvf~at~Gilead.org.il

I hate it when my emails contain typos!

The first paragraph below, however, misspelled "inappropriateness" and
"moniker"; and in my last paragraph, "seven [chronological slips]" means
"seven" that I can find in the course of the entire novel, including the
slip "1866/67" for "1867/68" in Nemo's autobiographical narrative in Part
III chapter xvi. There are probably other typos in the email, alas.

Tom


>From: "thomas mccormick" <tom_amity~at~hotmail.com>
>Reply-To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
>To: jvf~at~Gilead.org.il
>Subject: Re: Chronology--Who cares?
>Date: Thu, 15 Jun 2006 01:04:01 +0000
>
>Brian is certainly right about the historical significance of the so-called
>Sepoy Mutiny, and also right about the inapprotriateness of that
>trivializing monker.
>
>Verne was behaving appropriately in linking the anti-colonialist Nemo with
>Indian resistance to British colonialism. Since Hetzel's interference
>prevented Verne from giving Nemo the Polish nationality he originally
>intended, it was good of Verne to make a virtue of necessity in order to
>deliver an effective put-down of colonialism by substituting India for
>Poland and Britain for Russia.
>
>Exactly as Brian points out, the "sepoy rebellion" reference also serves as
>a critique of the Western positivistic world-view represented both by Smith
>and by (British and other) colonialism. Verily, one is reminded of the
>Vietnam War, and one is in particular remind of the devastating effect of
>the Tet Offensive on the U.S. leaders who embodied the America-ueber-alles
>mentality. Clearly, General Sherman's dictum, "In all history there is no
>instance of a nation of agriculturists making successful war against a
>nation of mechanics" needs some modification.
>
>There remains, however, the question of whether or not Verne was
>indifferent to chronological consistency within his tales. I object to the
>notion that Verne could not, or would not, endow his imaginary worlds with
>such consistency. This notion requires us to believe that he was willing to
>throw plausibility to the winds. Such a belief gives Verne's skill as a
>writer far too little credit, particularly in light of the two "Editorial
>Notes" in Mysterious Island which declare his intention to provide a
>consistent chronology.
>
>As I have pointed out, Nemo's autobiographical narrative contains two
>timelines, each internally consistent while being inconsistent with the
>other, and they are clearly distinguished by the respective phraseologies
>by which they date events (i.e. specific dates vs. statements of duration).
>The first timeline does indeed describe Nemo as particpating in the
>"mitiny" of 1857, and the second does describe him as having begun his
>submarine existence in 1838, which seems like a discrepancy but which
>actually is not. I say "is not" because Verne has told us how to to resolve
>this "discrepancy".
>
>In his "Editorial Notes", Verne has specifically instructed us to disregard
>the first timeline (same chronology as, or extrapolable from, 20L, and
>using dates) in preference to the other (new chronology, using statements
>of duration). Since there were other "seopy mutinies", prior as well as
>subsequent to 1857, we do have consistency if we simply discard the date
>1857. We are supposed to do so in any case, since this date is extrapolable
>from the 20TL timeline which Verne is telling us to ignore.
>
>Verne has carefully created, and just as carefully occulted in the passage
>dealing with Nemo's autobiography, an utterly consistent chronology for
>all the events of Mysterious Island, including those that are narrated by
>Ayrton and Nemo (if, that is, we allow for chronological slips,, of which I
>count seven). The dates that are "discrepant" are the same dates that Verne
>has carefully instructed us to ignore.
>
>Tom
>
>
>>From: Brian Taves <btav~at~loc.gov>
>>Reply-To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
>>To: Jules Verne Forum <jvf~at~Gilead.org.il>
>>Subject: Chronology--Who cares?
>>Date: Wed, 14 Jun 2006 17:49:22 -0400 (EDT)
>>
>>
>>Much thinking and time has gone into the chronological discussions.
>>
>>I'd suggest that one factor weighed more heavily than any other, for which
>>Verne felt, "consistency be damned." No event startled European racism
>>and colonial complacency than what was then labeled the "Sepoy Mutiny"
>>(and we would more appropriately today label the Revolt of 1857). For a
>>nation under imperial subjugation to almost overthrow the rule of the most
>>powerful nation on Earth, England, was a shock to Europeans.
>>
>>To link Nemo with that very revolt not only precluded any European
>>identity for his character, and the European/American claim to hegemony
>>over the power of science, but placed Nemo nationally and ideologically
>>with those striving to overcome colonialism. And that was simply more
>>important than preserving any internal timelines within the fiction.
>>
>>
>>Brian Taves
>>Motion Picture/Broadcasting/Recorded Sound Division
>>Library of Congress
>>101 Independence Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20540-4692
>>Telephone: 202-707-9930; 202-707-2371 (fax)
>>Email: btav~at~loc.gov
>>
>>
>>Disclaimer--All opinions expressed are my own.
>>
>>
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>

_________________________________________________________________
Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
Received on Thu 15 Jun 2006 - 05:01:29 IDT

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