Adeline’s review of The Titanic Story of Evelyn > Likes and Comments
8 likes · Like
I would also add that this book was littered with historical inaccuracy about the actual ship, which shows it was not proof read by anyone with knowledge of the actual ship. Also did a job on refreshing many of the myths or misconceptions that have since been dispelled
Ooof I didn’t get that far into it to find this out. I was throughly annoyed with the perception against men. Given Evelyn is deceased I’m not sure how the author was able to articulate her inner thoughts. Guess this was more fiction and should have been marketed as such. Such a shame. Did poor Evelyn an injustice.
Unfortunately, historical embellishment is becoming more so a part of the historical lexicon. But I'm not sure any of us can understand the values and feelings of someone born and raised in the Victorian era unless we have their written accounts of course.
I also am not enjoying it. I thought it would centre more so on Evelyn herself. I listened to the audiobook, but got bored in parts as it was bogged down in so much unneeded detail or side paths.
This is interesting feedback as I came to the book through an episode of the Australian podcast, Conversations, in which the author was interviewed. Her main source was Evelyn's grandneice who had kept a lot of her correspondence. Going to give the book a try despite these reviews.
Would be interested to know the inaccuracy’s myths etc you mention Dale, I know nothing about the titanic, so I can keep an ear out for them I’ve just started the audiobook for my bookclub.
Thanks for the question, Lynne.
Rather than spend the next week listing every inaccuracy—such as the oft-repeated claim that Titanic had a "double hull" or that she was 7,000 tonnes heavier than Olympic—I think it's more useful to explain why so many of these misconceptions appear.
A brief look at the endnotes suggests the book relies heavily on memoirs and biographies of people such as Charles Lightoller, Molly Brown, and Violet Jessop, along with many works written around the time of the disaster. While these are valuable historical sources, they inevitably reflect the knowledge available at the time. Since the wreck was discovered in 1985, decades of archaeological investigation and historical research have transformed our understanding of the ship, her design, and the events of the disaster.
For example, on page 375 the book describes the "big guns in the distance" as Titanic's boilers and engines breaking free and tumbling through the ship. However, the wreck tells a different story. The stern section clearly shows the enormous reciprocating engines still secured in their original positions. These were among the heaviest and most robustly mounted structures in the ship, rigidly bolted to substantial foundations designed to withstand the immense forces generated during normal operation. The boilers found in the debris field are generally understood to have escaped through areas of hull that opened during the breakup, rather than breaking loose and rolling through the ship.
Unfortunately, the book also repeats a number of long-standing Titanic myths. There is no evidence that J. Bruce Ismay instructed Captain Edward Smith to run the ship at maximum speed. Titanic did not have an unusually poor turning circle. Water did not simply pour into the boiler rooms like an uncontrolled flood immediately after the collision. And while the fourth funnel certainly contributed to the ship's appearance, it also served an important engineering purpose by providing ventilation and draught for the machinery spaces below. Likewise, Titanic did not have a full double hull; she had a double bottom.
If you genuinely want to understand the ship and the disaster, I wouldn't recommend starting here. There are many highly respected Titanic historians whose work reflects decades of meticulous research and incorporates the evidence revealed by the wreck itself. Mark Chirnside, Bruce Beveridge, Steve Hall, Tad Fitch, Bill Wormstedt, and J. Kent Layton are all excellent places to begin.
I'd also strongly recommend the Oceanliner Designs YouTube channel. Mike Brady has an exceptional ability to explain the ship's design, the disaster, and the many myths that have developed over the past century in a way that is both engaging and evidence-based.
The story of Titanic is fascinating enough without relying on outdated assumptions or well-worn tropes. The evidence uncovered over the last forty years has given us a far richer and more accurate understanding than was ever possible before the wreck was found.
Agree. This book is deeply flawed and reads like it was edited by AI. I have a copy that just for fun have taken a red pen to it and highlighted the outrageous amounts of editorialising and repetition. How many times do we have to read the words ‘mighty ship’ or ‘biggest liner the world has ever seen’.
Just for a start - Margaret Brown NEVER went by Molly in her lifetime. EVER. She was given this title after her death in a book and then by Hollywood in the film. She. Was. Never. Molly.
There were no horses on board.
There were no weddings on board.
JP Morgan owned 100% of White Star Line
Ismay was a peculiar man all told and therefore so easy to scapegoat and villainise. His testimony was valuable.
It has been thoroughly debunked that any kind of speed record was going to be attempted. Once they got clear of the ice it’s possible they would have liked to open her up and put her through her paces but White Star knew they would never outgun a Cunard Liner. White Star offered luxury as a point of difference.
The gates that locked third class was a govt /immigration requirement. Titanic was essentially an immigrant ship with a little bit of glamour upstairs to entice the posh people. Passengers were segregated so that medical checks etc could be done once they arrived
There were 8 Chinese Nationals on board. Six survived. There is an excellent book called The Six which is much better researched on much less evidence than this.
There is conjecture over whether Capt Smith was retiring.
There is NO verification that the radio operator Jack Phillips was at one end of collapsible B.
Shall I go on…
This is one of the greatest stories of stories told. It demands integrity, respect and critically unimpeachable research. I’m exhausted after this terrible effort!
Also, if Titanic did not sink it is a blip in the history books. No one would remember it.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Dale
(new)
May 01, 2026 03:52AM
I would also add that this book was littered with historical inaccuracy about the actual ship, which shows it was not proof read by anyone with knowledge of the actual ship. Also did a job on refreshing many of the myths or misconceptions that have since been dispelled
reply
|
flag
Ooof I didn’t get that far into it to find this out. I was throughly annoyed with the perception against men. Given Evelyn is deceased I’m not sure how the author was able to articulate her inner thoughts. Guess this was more fiction and should have been marketed as such. Such a shame. Did poor Evelyn an injustice.
Unfortunately, historical embellishment is becoming more so a part of the historical lexicon. But I'm not sure any of us can understand the values and feelings of someone born and raised in the Victorian era unless we have their written accounts of course.
I also am not enjoying it. I thought it would centre more so on Evelyn herself. I listened to the audiobook, but got bored in parts as it was bogged down in so much unneeded detail or side paths.
This is interesting feedback as I came to the book through an episode of the Australian podcast, Conversations, in which the author was interviewed. Her main source was Evelyn's grandneice who had kept a lot of her correspondence. Going to give the book a try despite these reviews.
Would be interested to know the inaccuracy’s myths etc you mention Dale, I know nothing about the titanic, so I can keep an ear out for them I’ve just started the audiobook for my bookclub.
Thanks for the question, Lynne.Rather than spend the next week listing every inaccuracy—such as the oft-repeated claim that Titanic had a "double hull" or that she was 7,000 tonnes heavier than Olympic—I think it's more useful to explain why so many of these misconceptions appear.
A brief look at the endnotes suggests the book relies heavily on memoirs and biographies of people such as Charles Lightoller, Molly Brown, and Violet Jessop, along with many works written around the time of the disaster. While these are valuable historical sources, they inevitably reflect the knowledge available at the time. Since the wreck was discovered in 1985, decades of archaeological investigation and historical research have transformed our understanding of the ship, her design, and the events of the disaster.
For example, on page 375 the book describes the "big guns in the distance" as Titanic's boilers and engines breaking free and tumbling through the ship. However, the wreck tells a different story. The stern section clearly shows the enormous reciprocating engines still secured in their original positions. These were among the heaviest and most robustly mounted structures in the ship, rigidly bolted to substantial foundations designed to withstand the immense forces generated during normal operation. The boilers found in the debris field are generally understood to have escaped through areas of hull that opened during the breakup, rather than breaking loose and rolling through the ship.
Unfortunately, the book also repeats a number of long-standing Titanic myths. There is no evidence that J. Bruce Ismay instructed Captain Edward Smith to run the ship at maximum speed. Titanic did not have an unusually poor turning circle. Water did not simply pour into the boiler rooms like an uncontrolled flood immediately after the collision. And while the fourth funnel certainly contributed to the ship's appearance, it also served an important engineering purpose by providing ventilation and draught for the machinery spaces below. Likewise, Titanic did not have a full double hull; she had a double bottom.
If you genuinely want to understand the ship and the disaster, I wouldn't recommend starting here. There are many highly respected Titanic historians whose work reflects decades of meticulous research and incorporates the evidence revealed by the wreck itself. Mark Chirnside, Bruce Beveridge, Steve Hall, Tad Fitch, Bill Wormstedt, and J. Kent Layton are all excellent places to begin.
I'd also strongly recommend the Oceanliner Designs YouTube channel. Mike Brady has an exceptional ability to explain the ship's design, the disaster, and the many myths that have developed over the past century in a way that is both engaging and evidence-based.
The story of Titanic is fascinating enough without relying on outdated assumptions or well-worn tropes. The evidence uncovered over the last forty years has given us a far richer and more accurate understanding than was ever possible before the wreck was found.
Agree. This book is deeply flawed and reads like it was edited by AI. I have a copy that just for fun have taken a red pen to it and highlighted the outrageous amounts of editorialising and repetition. How many times do we have to read the words ‘mighty ship’ or ‘biggest liner the world has ever seen’. Just for a start - Margaret Brown NEVER went by Molly in her lifetime. EVER. She was given this title after her death in a book and then by Hollywood in the film. She. Was. Never. Molly.
There were no horses on board.
There were no weddings on board.
JP Morgan owned 100% of White Star Line
Ismay was a peculiar man all told and therefore so easy to scapegoat and villainise. His testimony was valuable.
It has been thoroughly debunked that any kind of speed record was going to be attempted. Once they got clear of the ice it’s possible they would have liked to open her up and put her through her paces but White Star knew they would never outgun a Cunard Liner. White Star offered luxury as a point of difference.
The gates that locked third class was a govt /immigration requirement. Titanic was essentially an immigrant ship with a little bit of glamour upstairs to entice the posh people. Passengers were segregated so that medical checks etc could be done once they arrived
There were 8 Chinese Nationals on board. Six survived. There is an excellent book called The Six which is much better researched on much less evidence than this.
There is conjecture over whether Capt Smith was retiring.
There is NO verification that the radio operator Jack Phillips was at one end of collapsible B.
Shall I go on…
This is one of the greatest stories of stories told. It demands integrity, respect and critically unimpeachable research. I’m exhausted after this terrible effort!
Also, if Titanic did not sink it is a blip in the history books. No one would remember it.