Jump to content

Talk:Benjamin Morrell

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured articleBenjamin Morrell is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 20, 2010, and on June 30, 2023.
On this day... Article milestones
DateProcessResult
March 4, 2009Peer reviewReviewed
March 11, 2009Featured article candidatePromoted
April 15, 2015Featured article reviewKept
On this day... A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "On this day..." column on March 19, 2024.
Current status: Featured article

Comments from jackyd101

[edit]

Hi, I'd be happy to read and comment on the article. I'll start by congratulating you on what looks like a fine piece of work on an obscure but very interesting topic, which I am very much looking forward to reading.

  • "He subsequently sailed before the mast" - I know what is meant, but either change or explain this for those unfamiliar with the term.
    • Another user kindly put a Wiktionary link on the term where it occurred in the main body of the article. I have transferred this link to the first mention, in the lead.
  • "been a stumbling-block" - I suggest "hinderance" instead as a slightly better description.
    • Well, the source (Gould) says "stumbling-block", and the term is cited to him, so I'd better stick with it.
  • Its not essential, but I'd quote it if it comes from a quote.
  • "father, also Benjamin Morrell" - "also named Benjamin"
    • Done as you suggest
  • Instead of "Benjamin", I would refer to him as "Morrell" (or Morrell Jr) throughout
    • Done as you suggest
  • "on the ensuing voyage he was involved in a series of adventures" - are these of Morrell's own description, or as described by others (given his reputation for exaggeration).
    • The source (H.R. Mill) says "remarkable adventures", so I think it's OK as it stands
  • As above, regards the quote.
  • "world's remotest island" - most remote.
    • My OED says the superlative is "remotest", and that makes sense. For example, you wouldn't say: "I haven't the most remote idea where that came from":)
  • Fair enough.
  • "since Weddell's account was published earlier" - perhaps it would be better to give a date of publication.
    • Yes, done that - 1827, and quoted to a source
  • "Scottish seaman Alexander Selkirk had been marooned, providing the inspiration for the Robinson Crusoe story." - Interesting, but is is relevant?
    • Not really relevant, except that Morrell makes such a thing about his visit to Selkirk's island - bangs on about it for pages. If you think it should be dropped I'll cut it out, but it's a harmless bit of colour, really.
  • Up to you, I certainly have nothing against it.
  • Not a comment on the text per se, but I enjoyed that he saw the siege of Callao - my most recent FA, Murray Maxwell, also happened to have been there.
  • "Morrell writes: "The inhabitants are principally Mexicans and Spaniards who are very indolent and consequently very filthy", wrote Morrell." - duplication
    • Yes, removed.
  • "full-scale battle ending, he claims, with seventeen natives dead and seven of Tartar's men wounded, including Morrell with an arrow in his thigh" - I can't quite pin it down, but there is something odd about the phrasing here. Take a closer look.
    • Actually, I think the syntax is probably all right, but the sentence is convoluted. I've split it, and reworded.
  • Better
  • The terrapins he took from Galapagos - might they actually have been giant tortoises? I'm just curious, but I once studied the wildlife of Galapagos (in an amateur fashion) and I don't recall any terrapins.
    • Interesting point. Morrell certainly says "terrapins". I've done a bit of research, and it appears, from this and this, that in Morrell's time the terms "tortoise" and "terrapin" were used interchangeably. I've use the Beagle source as the basis of an explanatory footnote in the text.
  • Good work
  • Can you name the first wife?
    • Alas no, nobody can - Morrell didn't provide the information. I've added a note about this, too.
  • "Andrew Jackson's day" - President Jackson? If so, link him.
    • Isn't there some wikipedia rule about not linking terms if they occur in quotations? I seem to remember this, but can't put my finger on it. Perhaps someone else will know.
  • Not sure, do what you feel best.

Other than that, an excellent article that I really enjoyed - great work.--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking at the article so promptly, and for your helpful comments, most of which I have incorporated into the article. Brianboulton (talk) 13:39, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You're very welcome.--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:32, 1 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Memoir

[edit]

Article doesn't mention that Morrell's memoir was not written by himself but was contract by the publisher to a ghostwriter Samuel Woodworth. That the intention of the memoir was basically a dishonest sales piece to raise interest among US Congressmen so they would fund a 5th voyage to the Pacific, ostentatiously for exploration but really so that Morrell could engage in trade to pay off his debts from previous failed voyages. That his importance historically is based almost entirely on his celebrity status created by the memoir (which has literary qualities thanks to Woodworth but is fantasy in terms of the Antarctic explorations); and by a human-circus of two Polynesians he kidnapped and took on a tour of eastern US cities (importation of slaves was illegal at this time). These two "free men", Drako and Monday, were forced to pretend to be cannibals on stage and people paid money to see them, again to raise money to pay off Morrell's debts (Drako and Monday received only food and board). Drako was seen by Herman Melville during a show in Philly, and Drako subsequently became the inspiration for the character Queequeg in Moby-Dick. Article doesn't discuss the financial ruin of every one of his voyages, his personal financial ruin and how Morrell was on the constant run from creditors. Lots more info from the Fairhead book. -- GreenC 01:33, 20 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also that on his 5th voyage - which in some ways is the most important biographically but given 2 sentences in the article - he defrauded the ship owners and insurance companies for millions of dollars (today's money), that the "shipwreck" was highly suspicious, that he absconded with the best of the cargo (silks and teas) and tried to sell it and pocket the profits in London without telling the rightful owners (he was caught). Another aspects of this voyage is that he established a viable trade network amongst the natives of the New Britain island area, who believed him to be a god; and Drako was returned to his island with substantial first-world "cargo" goods and became a legend among his people to this day. -- GreenC 01:28, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above seems like an almost stream-of-consciousness rant against the article, based on a source which you only describe as "the Fairhead book". Articles are always susceptible to improvement, particularly if a new and significant source becomes available. But this process needs to be considered and collegial, not aggressive and confrontational. Some of the examples you give appear to warrant further investigation, others look like trivia. If you are seriously interested in improving this article you need, first, to give full publication details of the book which is apparently the basis of your assertions. When you've done that, I and anyone else interested in the article need reasonable time to acquire and examine the source, to discuss it and to amend the article as necessary. These are the steps which should precede, not follow, a FAR nomination which you have entered with unseemly haste. Brianboulton (talk) 11:23, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
PS: I have noted the details of the Fairhead book from your FAR nom. This book is not readily available in the UK and I may need a little more tme to access it. From the blurb, it looks as though it concentrates on a particular aspect of Morell's life, rather an a comprehensive study. Brianboulton (talk) 11:33, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Benjamin Morrell/archive1 is on hold; discussion can continue on talk while Brianboulton locates the book. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:35, 24 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now off hold for any last comments. DrKiernan (talk) 19:08, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paging etc

[edit]

(material transferred from Wikipedia:Featured article review/Benjamin Morrell/archive1}

The book is about 340 pages in paper format (the monologue portion). There is no rush. Also can I remove the book from the public web for copyright reasons? You should be able to save it (right-click save, or "save page as" etc..) -- GreenC 14:36, 26 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I don't understand the last two sentences of your previous comment. Meanwhile, I have redrafted the "fourth voyage" section, using a number of Fairhead references for which the book page refs are needed. Can you oblige? I can only supply the pdf page numbers, as follows: ref. 47: pp. 72–73; ref 49: 75–78; ref 51: 78–81; ref 52: 83; ref 53: 84; ref 54: 86–88; ref 57: 89; ref 60: 27–31; ref 61: 91–92; ref 63: 113; ref 64: 114–15. Brianboulton (talk) 00:35, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I'll translate the pages no problem. However I don't own a hardcopy, only the Epub edition. I know that the Epub page numbers are not the same as in the hardcopy. Thus the main ref should probably say it's based on the Yale University Press Epub edition. Here are the equivalent Epub page numbers:
  • Ref 47: pp. 46-47; Ref 49: pp. 48-50; Ref 51: pp. 50-52; Ref 52: pp. 53; Ref 53: pp. 54; Ref 54: pp. 55-56; Ref 57: pp. 56; Ref 60: pp. 22-24; Ref 61: pp. 57-58; Ref 63: pp. 71; Ref 64: pp. 71-72
-- GreenC 03:21, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Epub page numbers added. There will be a pause in activity for a few days, while I read the rest of Fairhead's book and also deal with other matters. Brianboulton (talk) 21:12, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

  • User:Green Cardamom: A further range of Fairhead refs has been added, their pdf pagination being as follows: ref 65: p121; ref 66: p123; ref 67: pp124–34; ref 68: pp148–51; ref 69: p168; ref 70: p180; ref 71: p. 239; ref 72: pp237–38; ref 73: p241; ref 75: 204; ref 76: pp242–45. Brianboulton (talk) 15:03, 31 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here they are with a couple notes:

-- GreenC 01:13, 1 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

{end of transferred material)


User:Green Cardamom: I have pretty well finished with adding material from Fairhead's book. Here are the pdf page numbers for the remaining citations:

Ref 78: 166–67; r79: 275; r80: 277; r81: 231; r82: 279–82; r83: 290–93; r. 85: 383; r86: 386–95; r87: 398–401; r88: 403–04; r89: 408; r90: 412–13; r91: 414; r92: 421; r93: 422–24; r94: 425–27; r95: 431; r97: 435; r98: 462; r99: 455; r100: 457; r101: 456–57; r102: 458; r459–62.

The link to the book gave up today (as it did earlier). I have a little more polishing to do before I am finished with it. Brianboulton (talk) 22:04, 10 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, server is back up. It's a shared development server. I'll add the footnotes hopefully this weekend. -- GreenC 01:27, 11 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Here they are. Question for the last one.

-- GreenC 17:48, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Ignore the last one – that was d'Urville's denunciation of Morrell, and I picked up the pages from the index. Brianboulton (talk) 18:54, 12 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

German Society of Polar Research

[edit]

It is on Wayback Machine. This ref should work: <ref>{{cite journal |dead-url=yes |archiveurl=https://web.archive.org/web/20090326061551/http://epic.awi.de/Publications/Polarforsch1963_1-2_19.pdf |archivedate=March 26, 2009 |last=Novatti |first=Ricardo |year=1963 |title=Pelagic Distribution of Birds in the Weddell Sea |journal=Polarforsch |issue=33 |pages=207–13 |publisher=German Society of Polar Research |url=http://epic.awi.de/Publications/Polarforsch1963_1-2_19.pdf}}</ref> -- GreenC 18:11, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]

First off nice work. This is a difficult article due to the mix of POVs, uncertainties, half-truths and theories, made even more difficult by FA standards and a major new source. When I opened that FAR it was under the assumption the article was abandoned due to no talk page response, which was a mistake (though one based on experience). I'd never opened a FAR before so it wasn't until down the process that I discovered about notifying the creator. Had I had known who you were and were active I wouldn't have done it that way. So I learned something about FAR.

Regarding the article, my question is in regards to the sections. If we assume that Morrell was essentially a non-notable entity prior to the publication of his book after his 4th voyage (and his cannibal show and subsequent stage play), and that the book was ghost-written by someone better know for fiction and drama, and there was a means and a motive to embellish the book (for the publisher to sell copy, for the ghost-writer to be successful, for Morrell to raise funds for a 5th voyage). And consider his 5th voyage was probably his most productive, since he established working trade relations in the Bismark Sea area, the first person to do so, no small thing as these trade relations could have been very valuable (had it been followed up) - and he was successful first contact for many tribes and islands, which is a significant part of their history. I think Fairhead's book says he is still remembered in that area to this day (or by proxy Drako).

Given all this context, should his 5th voyage be given more space and not relegated as a subsection of "Later career" which makes it look like his 4 voyages were his main career. When they were probably a lot of embellishments for the purpose of funding the 5th voyage. t's possible I'm biased in that view by Fairhead's book since this is the only book about Morrell I have read. -- GreenC 22:46, 13 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

From a purely structural viewpoint, the fifth voyage has the same status (level-3 subheading) as the four voyages, so I don't think it has been "relegated". That however is a minor issue. The section on this voyage could indeed be expanded, given the amount of information in Fairhead, and I can see the point of including in the Appraisal section a sentence or two such as you provide, above, about his establishing trade relations in the Bismarck Sea area. I wouldn't myself go further than that. Most pre-Fairhead sources give greatest prominence to Morrell's Antarctic exploits, either real or imagined, rather than to his activities as a trading pioneer (again real or imagined).
Fairhead is an anthropologist, and I think he looks at Morrell more with the eye of the anthropologist than of the objective historian. Sometimes he adopts a fictive style and recounts the thoughts of his subjects. He also tends to present theories (e.g. the staged death) as absolute fact, before presenting evidence which shows the theory to be plausible but by no means proven. The book is about other people besides Morrell, and would be an excellent basis for beefing up, for example, the Woodworth articles, but that is I feel a job for others. For myself, I am anxious to proceed with other work. Brianboulton (talk) 21:29, 14 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The book is part of a series called "New Directions in Narrative History" so there is a conscious goal to use narrative techniques. Not sure what the New Direction is? A new style of NH, or new direction towards NH. I agree there is good material for other people, events, and more on the 5th. I'm also busy with existing projects and will keep this in mind. -- GreenC 01:05, 16 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Benjamin Morrell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 15:19, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Benjamin Morrell. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:53, 31 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Benjamin_Morrell&oldid=1214604141"