The ITV series of Hornblower telemovies arguably constituted one of the high points of my childhood. That's the first point. The second point is that I recently read several installments in Patrick O'Brien's excellent Aubrey-Maturin series, and developed a fondness for the Napoleonic period and all its accoutrements (the Sharpe series is another example of the Napoleonic page-turner). Thirdly, the publication date helpfully informs me that "Beat to Quarters" was copyrighted in 1938, which puts it at the tail end of the interwar period, a time during which I believe some of the very best literature ever to be produced was being written and published on both sides of the Atlantic.
So, imagine my surprise when I found that I loathed Horatio Hornblower - or, at least, his first literary incarnation. It is said that O'Brian, writing thirty years later, drew much inspiration from C.S. Forester's Hornblower series. But O'Brian did better than that; he improved Forester's concept immeasurably.
"Beat to Quarters" reads very much like a child's impression of an Aubrey-Maturin novel. It has a smaller dose of naval jargon, which I might have once welcomed, but the simplified treatment of life on board HM frigate Lydia seems like a cop-out or a charicature. We are never shown something when we can be told it; we can't properly appreciate the complexity of commanding a warship because, instead of laying out the complexity for all to see, Forester resorts to telling us repeatedly how very, very, awfully, jolly difficult it is to be a captain, and that you must have a heart of gold and nerves of steel and so forth. This oversimplification also manifests itself in the narrative voice, which persistently intrudes on the narrative with Forester's editorial asides, which should have been turned into footnotes in the second draft and then thrown out altogether in the third. Take this beauty, for example, and tell me if you can maintain a sense of total narrative immersion when faced with such writing:
"Any woman who could transfer herself in that fashion from boat to ship in an open roadstead, and could ascend a rope ladder unassisted, must be too masculine for his [Hornblower's] taste. Besides, an Englishwoman must be unsexed to be in Panama without a male escort - the phrase "globe trotting" with all its disparaging implication, had not yet been invented, but it expressed exactly Hornblower's feeling about her." [pg. 125-126]
Three thing about that passage. Well, four. The first is that I have been pulled by my thesis supervisors - two historians - about using anachronistic language. I use it sometimes because I'm from the 21st century and I try very hard to forget that I am. /but it is often jarring - and occasionally, OCCASIONALLY defensible - and I eliminate it where I can. I don't draw attention to it by launching into a little "nudge-nudge, wink-wink, women-these-days-eh?" discourse with my reader.
Which brings me to the second point: I don't think Forester is joking. I have previously commented on this site that i consider myself to be unoffendable - sex, violence, drug use, swearing, whatever - the part of my brain that is supposed to rail against these things has packed up and left and has left all its duties up to whichever hemisphere or cortex says things like, "Oh, isn't that fascinating!" I don't get in a huff, about anything. Except for other people getting in a huff. But here's the thing: Forester is recording an attitude towards women here that is attributable entirely to his character, and it appears to be a very histoorically accurate rendering of a Napoleonic English naval captain's internal dialogue. But it's also self-evidently Forester's internal (or, now, external) dialogue, and the reader then begins to suspect very strongly that what they are witnessing is not an excellent rendering of contemporary social norms, but rather a boorish modern writer with retrogressive views using his creation as convenient cover. In short. Forester makes no attempt to conceal his authorial presence, and at times I found that presence to be quite odious.
Along that vein, let us consider the literary implications of this passage and others. This is not a good book, in the conventional sense of the word, because it aspires to qualities it does not have. Maybe Forester's authorial asides were attempts at a more knowing, cozy, postmodernist style of writing where the readership is invited to participate (in a limited way) in the narrative by responding to asides and being directly addressed by the author. I've read a few books that pull this trick off convincingly, and a few which do not. While I haven't read it, Italo Calvino's "If On a Winter's Night a Travaller" seems to fit the bill perfectly. "Beat to Quarters" does not. It all feels very hackneyed - stylistically tired; vague on details in a childrens' literature kind of way; boring even when it's exciting; full of "love" themes apparently written by someone with a favourite cat, but nothing more.
That's the third point. The fourth is that if I had read this in, say, 1939 - newly published and exciting and whatnot - the take-home message for me would be that, by Jove, the British Empire is a place well worth defending and I'm going to toddle off down to the local recruiting station and join the RAF in case Jerry ever decides to have another crack at Blighty. Bish bosh! Tally ho! It has dated very poorly. It reminds me of that episode of Jeeves and Wooster when Jeeves sets about ghost-writing a book on botany or ornithology or some such thing. The resultant text is laden with pedagogical asides along the lines of, "Now remember, children, that if you really want to knwo about the North American barking swallow, you should put this modest volume aside and pick up SIr Ernest Beedlewomp's "Birds and Bees..." etc etc. There aren't any specific or direct appeals, but one gets the distinct impression that "Beat to Quarters" is an educational tool as well as a piece of entertainment. It's the kind of artform that peaked in the late Victorian era but continued until the Empire had been completely dismantled, whose aim is not aesthetic beauty or intellectual daring, but to produce an idealised version of society. "Beat to Quarters" is like socialist realism (you know- all the painting of Stalin sitting with cherubic children on his lap while combine harvesters bring in a bumper crop in the background), just with a late-imperial bias.
I may have completely gotten the wrong end of the stick in this last point, and "Beat to Quarters" may well be a brilliant piece of satire, or a perfectly pitched and formulated period drama. But I doubt it. When Forester's pomposity is the most believable thing in the whole book, I know it's time to revisit the Hornblower DVDs and see the naval hero as he should be seen: uninhibited by the inadequacies of his creator.