Blog Post the First - Nerds and Their Docudramas

In case you've been living on an iceberg the past few months, you'd be aware it's been 100 years since the sinking of the Titanic. For historical nerds like myself, we get a tad excited by anniversaries of major events due to the increase in documentaries that come out. We care little for the James Cameron epic in 3D due to massive inaccuracies (but we forgive Cameron because he has produced a documentary as penance. Check out the recreation of the sinking he put together with his CGI crew).

When I was a cherub in primary school (my mother scoffs at my use of the word ‘cherub’), I would read Sherlock Holmes, Agatha Christie and historical books. Yes, I was indeed the coolest person in the back corner of the library. While I was wondering where my friends were, I became fascinated about the Titanic. I was ll years old and the film had just come out. Although I didn’t give much of a toss about the movie, the hype was enough to spark a fascination for me that has lasted more than a decade.

So in this centennial year, and now a mature adult, I would embrace the influx of new documentaries like they were cherished loved ones, and I would run screaming from ‘Raise the Titanic’ like it was a leprotic axe murderer coughing up bile.

I ended up turning my interest to the first cab off the rank: a barely-hyped docudrama about the 1912 British Inquiry which, either by luck or design, the History Channel in Australia picked up from BBC1 Northern Ireland. It was so quietly placed in the programming that, were it not for fans of lead actor Paul McGann, I probably would have missed it.

I knew 2 post-disaster inquiries were held: one in the U.S. within days of the survivors' arrival in New York, and a much bigger one in the U.K. less than a month later, but they were rarely addressed in documentaries or books. Now my interest was piqued. And for half a week I did what every self-respecting historical nerd would do: I downloaded the entire transcript (959 pages officially, 2,095 in MS Word) and read the full British Inquiry. If you're at all interested, you can read the transcript online via the Titanic Inquiry Project. You know the stuff you read in the books or heard in the documentaries? Most of it came from those testimonies.

And now with my brain full of Edwardian Perry Mason, I watched ‘The Titanic Inquiry’ (‘SOS – Titanic Inquiry’ in the U.K.). The one-hour docudrama focuses entirely on the Californian conspiracy in a Reader’s Digest version of Days 7 and 8 of the inquiry. Sir Rufus Isaacs' opening statement (taken from Day 1) is cut down to only a few lines, and the Commissioner’s verdict (taken from Day 36) is only a tiny portion of his findings which also dealt with lifeboats, evacuation procedures, passenger and crew behaviour, emergencies at sea, inefficient watertight compartments, and more. They do feature a scene early on outside the courtroom where Robertson Dunlop, the lawyer for the Californian's crew, discusses the inquiry so far. He gives the impression things are bigger than what they seem.

“They do not relish taking all the blame for the insufficient number of lifeboats... They may try and deflect attention in another direction.”

For those unaware of the SS Californian, she was a ship apparently only a handful of miles away from the Titanic when she sank. The captain is believed to have ignored the Titanic's distress flares and wireless calls for help. Vital evidence was lost prior to both inquiries so to this day questions remain concerning the Californian's true whereabouts and her crew's actions that night.

"Really try and do yourself justice."

While Isaacs didn’t personally question everyone like in the docudrama, he did question Captain Stanley Lord. The scathing ‘Do just think!’ and ‘Really try to do yourself justice’ were uttered by him to press Lord's ambiguous responses. Even without clear evidence, Lord had his name publicly tarnished and lost his captaincy. He soon resurrected his career, though. He was the Robert Downey Jr. of 1912.

"These are answers that do not do you the least good, and they are not the answers that you want."

The good thing about the docudrama is that the courtroom scenes are more or less faithfully recreated from the transcript. Obviously chunks of banter had to be cut for the sake of time and coherency, but the lines that remain are as they were a century ago.

However, it was a shame to overlook the Californian wireless operator, particularly due to the fact his absence creates a big gaping plot hole (why, if they saw rockets, was the operator not summoned to his post?). This was something Isaacs and his team touched on in the actual inquiry, and they questioned the Marconi Operator, Cyril Evans. He had been asleep at the time and apparently no one asked him to man his post until an hour or so after the sinking.

I’m willing to let this omission slide because of time constraints. As the courtroom scenes are intercut with outside conversations between the Californian crew members, I’ll assume that the issue of the wireless operator was settled in those unseen moments.

"The Second Officer remarked to me, 'Look at her now; she looks very queer out of the water; her lights look queer.'"

In the days since watching this docudrama, I've studied the transcripts further and reread the books I have with a whole new insight. I even opened my box of replica Titanic paperwork and discovered one of the large posters, a cutaway of the ship, is the same version they used in the British Inquiry. And so my fascination with the tragedy has grown once more.

A century later, questions still remain concerning the Californian and her crew's conduct.

When The Titanic Inquiry aired on the evening of the 14th, I watched it with 3 sports nuts (I claimed the TV mid-football game). By the time the credits rolled all 4 of us were debating who we thought was responsible. So on that level the production achieved its intention: inform and entertain. It provoked a discussion that lasted longer than the program itself. It didn't matter how much everyone knew, we all had an opinion for or against the Californian. In the end the football game was forgotten.

I remain in awe of how a one-hour docudrama reignited a fire kindled long ago in a school library. It challenges those who think they know the facts. It divides opinion and it shows us glimpses of a much, much bigger story.

And there's little doubt, in the middle of all this TV and online hype, another 11 year-old has begun their journey of discovery just like I did. Keep an eye out for their blog in the years to come.