Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
One of the central historical tenets of conservative thought is a respect for “tradition.” Russell Kirk said that conservatives believe that “[c]ustom, convention, and old prescription are checks upon man’s anarchic impulse and upon the innovator’s lust for power.” But Kirk also said that “[s]ociety must alter, for prudent change is the means of social preservation.” Edmund Burke put it this way: “Change is inevitable, . . . [b]ut let change come as the consequence of a need generally felt, not inspired of fine-spun abstractions.”
Liberals portray conservatives as pure reactionaries who wish to put society into reverse. Nothing demonstrates this pernicious liberal tendency than the false “conservative war on women.” Conservatives strongly believe the country has gone way too far in inhibiting markets and allowing overweening bureaucratic regulation to clog the economic system (the EPA’s meddling regulation of carbon dioxide is a good example). Other conservatives believe that abortion-on-demand for the past 39 years has been a national tragedy and that the current efforts to redefine marriage will, if successful, knock another prop from beneath a tottering culture.
Yet I don’t know a single conservative who isn’t glad to have modern sanitation, hot water on demand, or antibiotics. But, in a variety of ways, we are leery of the “innovator’s lust for power”—particularly when the innovator is in the form of a government-run command and control society; we see it in grand utopian schemes like Obamacare. Ironically, conservatives aren’t afraid to change entitlements (it’s the liberals who are reactionary on that issue) or to make market-based changes that will improve American health care; but we oppose wild-eyed schemes that will bankrupt the nation or that are based on the premise that human nature is perfectible.
Love for tradition is central to my beliefs. I agree with Edmund Burke’s belief that it is essential that we link the generations together by paying fealty to the great traditions of the past (those that reflect the first principles of our culture), and by leaving a civilized, strong society as an inheritance to our children:
“By this unprincipled facility of changing the state often, and as much, and in as many ways, as there is floating fancies or fashions, the whole chain and continuity of commonwealth would be broken. No one generation could link with another. Men would become little better than the flies of the summer.”
With that as background, let me point out a wonderful passage written by Patrick O’Brian. I noted in a post a few days ago that Peter Robinson has inspired me to re-read O’Brian’s Master and Commander novels featuring Jack Aubrey, the captain, and Stephen Maturin, the philosophical surgeon. I just finished the third novel, H.M.S. Surprise.
In that volume, O’Brian presents a wonderful scene that illustrates the conservative respect for tradition. Tom Pullings, a young naval officer and protégé of Jack Aubrey, is teaching a young midshipman the weights of different ships by pointing out and describing a group of India merchant ships then passing by their ship. Pullings calls them “twelve hundred ton ships” even as he says that some are as much as fifteen hundred tons. When the midshipman suggests that it would be simpler to call the fifteen hundred ton ships “fifteen hundred ton ships,” Pullings is aghast. Instead, he reaffirms the tradition of the British navy and its fight against unnecessary innovation:
“Simpler, maybe: but it would never do. You don’t want to be upsetting the old ways. Oh dear me, no. God’s my life, if the Captain was to hear you carrying on in that reckless Jacobin, democratical line, why, I dare say he would turn you adrift on a three-inch plank, with both your ears nailed down to it, to learn you bashfulness. . . . No, no: you don’t want to go arsing around with the old ways: the French did so, and look at the scrape it has gotten them into.”
Isn’t that a beautifully-written passage? But, more importantly, it teaches us why we can continue to live with “miles” and “yards” instead of “kilometers” and “meters,” and why British currency is charming because it eschews the metric system. [Note: I’m not a complete troglodyte—I understand why science uses the decimal system].
The old ways aren’t always the best, but they should never be replaced just because they are old and tried. The old ways are often best because they reflect a moral order and the wisdom of the ages. Yes, change is necessary, but history shows that to be effective, it must always be thoughtful and almost always incremental.
Respect for tradition and the rejection of revolutionary change and “transformational leaders” remain central to the conservative view of life. Your thoughts?
- Comment (66)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (4)
Comments:
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Indeed, the English/American measurement system, is humane, it is rooted in our actual bodies, the world around us, and therefore, I think, far more "rational". Another reminder to not go moving a boundary stone set up by our forefathers. And, yes, metric is great for science, but daily life...forget it.
And yes, those novels are just a wonder, the best historical fiction ever written, and among the greatest novels written in the 20th century.
Mar '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
The innovator's lust for power? Any lust for power is objectionable. Governments have a very limited scope of competency, and when they attempt to stretch beyond that, they make a hash of things. Their default impulse when they do make a hash of things is to get more power to set it right. Lots of luck snatching any of it back from them.
Innovation isn't to be discouraged, but...
...not all ideas are created equal.
Jun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
St. Salieri:
And yes, those novels are just a wonder, the best historical fiction ever written, and among the greatest novels written in the 20th century. · 29 minutes ago
The best description of O'Brian's books goes something like this: people think the primary theme is seafaring--in reality, these books are really one long novel, whose primary theme is friendship. That seems just right to me.
Percival: The innovator's lust for power? Any lust for power is objectionable. Governments have a very limited scope of competency, and when they attempt to stretch beyond that, they make a hash of things. Their default impulse when they do make a hash of things is to get more power to set it right. Lots of luck snatching any of it back from them.
Innovation isn't to be discouraged, but...
...not all ideas are created equal. · 8 minutes ago
When private capital is innovating, it's a good thing because the risk/reward equation is constantly evaluated, and if something doesn't work, they quit doing it (unlike government).
As to the picture, I wonder how this father is getting along with his prosthetic legs.
Nov '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
TR: An English friend introduced me to O'Brian 3 years ago; I'm nearly halfway through...I love them! (My friend described them as 'Jane Austen aboard ship'. ) A sterling recommendation - pun intended. Thanks for this...
Jun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
That's not a bad description. There are certainly "comedy of manners" moments in every book. And, of course, Lizzy and Darcy were falling in love while Aubrey and Maturin were plying the seas.
I've always been a sucker for great historical fiction. O'Brian is simply the best. Second best for me are the novels of Dorothy Dunnett, a Scottish writer (but that's a topic for another day).
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Indeed, one long novel that stretches almost an entire life time. In a way I'm glad O'Brian died before he could finish it...Capt. Aubrey, Maturin and Co., can sail on, and on, forever, the next adventure beckoning just beyond the horizon. Friendship is certainly one and probably the greatest theme the threads through the whole serious, duty, love, perseverance, liberty, and courage are present throughout. Although the idea that this is Austen at sea gives me the shivers...
tabula rasa
The best description of O'Brian's books goes something like this: people think the primary theme is seafaring--in reality, these books are really one long novel, whose primary theme is friendship. That seems just right to me.
Jan '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
But the essential element of maintaining tradition, which is clearly stated by Tom in his description of what Lucky Jack would do to the erring midshipman were Aubrey to hear of such Jacobin innovation, is condign punishment.
If you don't support that, if you lack the self-confidence to see authority exercised, then all of your fine words about Burke and tradition are just a lot of blah, blah, blah.
Your thoughts?
BTW, for those who have read the 20 volume opus, I highly recommend Dean King's biography, "Patrick O'Brian [A Life Revealed]."
Edited on June 3, 2012 at 9:28pmJun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
I love the idea of them sailing on forever and ever. You are absolutely correct that other the other themes you mentioned are present in the books. I haven't a clue what O'Brian's politics were like, but the books are conservative in outlook. What greater metaphor for freedom than a sailing ship, alone of the wide ocean. No nanny state out there.
Finally, no Austen hating here. There were no broadsides from a man 0'war in Austen's books, but the conversation between Lizzy and Lady Catherine in Pride and Prejudice was as good as a sea battle. Lizzy laid herself alongside Lady Catherine and sent broadside after broadside into her.
Jun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Freesmith: But the essential element of maintaining tradition, which is clearly stated by Tom in his description of what Lucky Jack would do to the erring midshipman were Aubrey to hear of such Jacobin innovation, is condign punishment.
If you don't support that, if you lack the self-confidence to see authority exercised, then all of your fine words about Burke and tradition are just a lot of blah, blah, blah.
Your thoughts?
BTW, for those who have read the 20 volume opus, I highly recommend Dean King's biography, "Patrick O'Brian [A Life Revealed]." · 3 hours ago
Edited 3 hours ago
Good points. Aubrey liked a happy ship, but when necessary he would lower the boom. There was no question who was in charge.
Nov '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
TR: Dame Dorothy Dunnett was recommended by the same friend; found her humo[u]rous, cinematic and informative. Liked the House of Niccolo better than the Lymond Chronicles, though.
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
As a conservative, I agree, I really do.... but I can't say that I have anything but affection for the metric system. It is so easy to use! So easy to learn and teach!
My older two sons and I have done a science course for their sixth grade year called The Universe in My Hands that goes through the scale of things in the universe, starting with human scale (1 x 10 to the zero power meter). When we did the course last, this amazing visualization tool did not yet exist, but it does now for me and my daughter to use next year. Enjoy!
And I love the Patrick O'Brian books. The movie Master and Commander was fabulous, although not perfect, and I hope that they will make more and do as beautiful a job.
Jun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Funny, I liked the Lymond Chronicles the best. Which is one of the great mysteries and beauties of humanity. Life would be so boring if we all had precisely the same tastes.
Jun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Mama: It's Ok, we don't have litmus tests on the right, and if we did, it wouldn't be one's allegiance to the metric system. For science, I don't think there's an alternative. But compare the euro to pounds, shillings, pence etc. British currency is way more interesting.
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
"What shall we do about poor little Tigger? / If he never eats nothing, he'll never get bigger. / He doesn't like honey or haycorns or thistles / because of the taste and because of the bristles. / And all the good things which an animal likes / Have the wrong sort of swallow or too many spikes. / But whatever his weight in pounds, shillings, or ounces / he always seems bigger because of his bounces." ~ A.A. Milne, "Tigger Comes to the Forest"
Jun '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Excellent. Try to re-imagine it expressed in euros or kilograms.
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
No Austen hating, just the sad realization that you are (likely- ahem) correct!
tabula rasa
I love the idea of them sailing on forever and ever. You are absolutely correct that other the other themes you mentioned are present in the books. I haven't a clue what O'Brian's politics were like, but the books are conservative in outlook. What greater metaphor for freedom than a sailing ship, alone of the wide ocean. No nanny state out there.
Finally, no Austen hating here. There were no broadsides from a man 0'war in Austen's books, but the conversation between Lizzy and Lady Catherine in Pride and Prejudice was as good as a sea battle. Lizzy laid herself alongside Lady Catherine and sent broadside after broadside into her. · 15 hours ago
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
NOOOOO....please, take it back, I do so love the Mama Toad posts, to hear this is too much for a Monday morning, where's my tea!
Feb '11
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
St. Salieri: NOOOOO....please, take it back, I do so love the Mama Toad posts, to hear this is too much for a Monday morning, where's my tea! · 9 hours ago
St. S -- Please don't think I dislike the old system, I just really love the metric system.
Well, OK, maybe I do dislike the old system. I teach my students pints and pounds, the world around, even though that mnemonic isn't entirely true (pints are not 1 lb in the UK,, but 1. 25 lb) but metric is so logical and lovely.
Check out the link I shared above, showing the scale of the universe from the Planck length of 1 x 10 ^-35 meters up to 1.4 x 10 ^26 meters. So elegant. Don't hate me because metric's beautiful!
Aug '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
tabula rasa:
The old ways aren’t always the best, but they should never be replaced just because they are old and tried.
Allow me a pedantic quibble:
On a local scale, sometimes you do want to replace something just because it's old and tried. Experimentation in its proper place is useful, after all.
When I cook, I sometimes abandon old, tried ways simply for the sake of doing something new. I've learned a lot from this, both what to do (tasty new recipes) and what not to do (dinner disasters). I'm a better cook for it.
What matters is keeping experimentation in its proper place with respect to tradition. You experiment on a small scale, expecting failure rather than success to be the norm. Experimentation takes place within the framework of tradition, not the other way around.
I like how Sowell describes tradition as inherited knowledge. Because tradition is authenticated by prolonged use, it's more likely to work than an arbitrary innovation. Even so, the test of time isn't a perfect one.
We can't enslave ourselves to tradition, but tradition should get the benefit of the doubt.
Edited on June 5, 2012 at 12:43amAug '10
Re: Patrick O’Brian and Conservative Respect for "Tradition"
Besides, if you want to make yourself a slave to tradition, which tradition do you enslave yourself to? Stone-age tradition? The New Deal tradition?... A melange of whatever traditions you happen to fancy? That leads to weirdness like this.
Edited on June 5, 2012 at 1:59am