O’Brian, Patrick: (03) H.M.S. Surprise (audio)

I’ve heard the third of Patrick O’Brian’s Aubrey-Maturin novels, H.M.S. Surprise, cited as the point where the series really comes together. I don’t know that I can speak to that; it seems smoother to me, in that its land-based plot isn’t just a big lump at the beginning, but on the other hand, we no longer need to be introduced to those land-based characters. However, to the extent that these assessments are based on Stephen’s expanded role in the plot, I think it’s fair: it’s necessary for the overall balance of the series that Stephen be more than just the sidekick along for the ride, which is accomplished nicely here.

I remembered basically nothing of this book but the sloth (which Patrick Tull pronounces “slowth”; is it just the animal that’s pronounced that way, or the sin too?). I don’t know how I could have forgotten various events, but that just goes to show that audio is really the best way for me to first experience these.

A spoiler-filled post follows.

3 Replies to “O’Brian, Patrick: (03) H.M.S. Surprise (audio)”

  1. sloth
    c.1175, “indolence, sluggishness,” formed from M.E. [slou, slowe] (see slow); replacing O.E. [slæwð]. Sense of “slowness, tardiness” is from c.1380. As one of the deadly sins, it translates L. accidia. The slow-moving mammal first so called 1613, a translation of Port. [preguiça], from L. [pigritia] “laziness” (cf. Sp. [perezosa] “slothful,” also “the sloth”).
    So, ‘sloth’ the sin might just as easily be spelt ‘slowth’, by analogy with ‘warmth’ and ‘breadth’ and ‘health’, for it did originally mean “the state or attribute of being slow”.
    As for the animal, that’s an interesting question. The local name for it was “lazy thing” in Portuguese, and the Spanish parallels that. But accidia in Latin didn’t really mean laziness, as I understand it, but more like lethargic melancholy. I’m not sure whether that sense survives in the modern interpretation of the deadly sin of ‘sloth’.

  2. re: sloth: so the British pronunciations of the sin and the animal are both “slowth”? Because the US pronunciation of the sin is “slôth” [*] and probably the animal too though it comes up less in conversation.
    [*] Accent marks provided by this pronunciation key, anyway.

  3. I believe that’s correct, wrt pronunciations on the two sides of the pond. Without any reference to back me up, I’ll guess that this is another case of American English preserving vowels that were either superseded later in England, or belonged to an underclass accent (East Anglian, Sussex, cockney) that provided a disproportionate fraction of early settlers.
    The OE version “slæwð” probably rhymed with modern American ‘mouth’. I’d have to go review my Vowel Shifts to know which came first after that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *