Customer Reviews

The Ship That Stood Still: The Californian and Her Mysterious Role in the Titanic Disaster

5 star:		(8)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The only reason this book got 4 starts instead of 5 is the slight anti-American tone at times (for example, the US inquiries are treated as a almost a joke) and something in this much detail could not help but be tedious at points (the discussion of "port" and "starboard" lights comes to mind),but it is extremely well-done, leaves no point untouched, examines minutely any evidence in Lord's favor, and comes to the point of the matter- he saw what he knew "might have been" distress rockets and did nothing- and really, that is the end of it.

I have about 20 books on the Titanic and had lost hope that I would find anything new about this sea disaster.This book tells everything about the Californian's role and uses facts to back up every example. I loved this book!!!!!!

No matter what your view is on this particular aspect of the Titanic tragedy, you cannot help but be impressed by this book. This is, without question, one of the best-researched Titanic books ever written. If you happen to come across this rare gem don't hesitate to pick it up, because it's likely that you won't see it anywhere else!

One may wonder why a book like this should have to be written. Clearly Lord is guilty as sin! On that cold April night he just didn't want to be bothered with a strange ship firing rockets in the distance. It was easier to do nothing, hoping everything would go away. But it wasn't so easy or comforting to deal with the blame that fell on him. How dare we blame such a responsible captain? But the facts are there. Reade goes through them step by step like a first class lawyer. This must be done because many still feel that Lord did nothing wrong. Like OJ Simpson's defenders, they believe what they want to believe. My only fault with this book was that it was not the thriller other Titanic books have been. It tended to bog down in jargon and nautical language.

There is no excuse for Captain Stanley Lord's behaviour on the night of the sinking of the Titanic. He admitted, at the British Enquiry, that he had been duly informed of rockets being fired, that he had insisted at least twice on being told whether they were coloured or white rockets. he had to admit, under questioning, that 1) he was told they were white; 2) that he knew that white rockets meant signals of distress at sea. The fact of the matter is that Lord did not know that it was the titanic in distress. he may have thought iut was some tramp or whaler or whatever, and he was not about to risk his ship for some such vessel. This behaviour is unexcusable ! He should have reacted and at least tried to find out more. Had he done so, he would arguably have been able to save hundrs of lives .The "mystery vessel" in between Californian and Titanic is NOT the issue ! Lord knew a ship, some ship, any ship WAS I DISTRESS and chose to ignore it. For this his memory must live forever in infamy!

This book gives great detail as what happened that night, April 14-15, 1912. The Californian should have responded to the distress rockets, sad such loss of life. I recommend this book.

I found "The Ship that stood still" to be a very informative & enjoyable book. It is written in such a fashion that it does not deluge the casual reader with incomprehensible nautical terms. It is a reasoned & dispassionate exploration of the Californian's role in the Titanic disaster. There has much partisan literature produced in the past relating to the conduct of Captain Lord. This book does not descend into partiality.

If you're a fan of the Titanic this book is for you! All your Questions about the Californian are put to rest! It's hard to find but well worth it!!

I think you should not only read this book, but the other side of the story to get a full picture - A titantic Myth. I think Lord is given too much blame. He was the scapegoat, and he was not given his full rights when the US interviewed him. That is without a doubt a fact. However, I can't help but believe he could have done more. However, he wasn't the one who hit an iceberg, nor the one who lost members on his ship.

Reade's book certainly puts quite a bit of blame for the tremendous loss of life on the Titanic on Captain Lord. But it must be kept in mind that even if he had fired up his boilers and navigated safely through the ice to the area where the Titanic went down, he still may not have been able to save many lives. The loss of the Titanic and the 1500 people must be blamed on Captain Edward J. Smith. Why didn't the passengers on the Titanic take the mattresses off the bunks and use them as rafts? Maybe they would not have had enough bouancy to hold someone.