Wednesday 20 March 2024

About The Captain

Question And Answer, CHAPTER IV, pp. 32-33.

Two crew members discuss the captain.

Hideki: "'It isn't fair. Who does he think he is, God Almighty?'"

Lorenzen: "'A captain has to be, I guess.'"

Hideki: "'But if he keeps this up, everyone will hate him!'"

Lorenzen: "'I imagine he's a pretty good rule-of-thumb psychman himself. Quite probably that's what he wants.'"

In my experience of British schools, a new Head Teacher was always brought in from outside. One teacher who had spent his entire career in a single school and who had wound up as Deputy Head would have had to move elsewhere to become a Head. I imagine that the same rule applies to ships' captains.

One function of the Head is to unite the staff in their criticisms of him. Having arrived from outside, he is not a member of any already existing faction. The crew in Question And Answer/Planet Of No Return has not already existed but has been assembled for the first time for a hazardous interstellar mission. However, this crew is so fractious that the success of the mission is in question as is the competence of the "psychmen" who had selected the crew members. But, as we continue to read, we learn that there is a reason for all this.

3 comments:

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Paul!

A Head of school, ship captain, commander of an army, chief of state, etc., if they are to be worthy of the posts they hold, have to think, act, issue directives, etc., in ways that advances the goals, objectives, and needs of their people. And that will often mean not being to please everybody.

Ad astra! Sea

S.M. Stirling said...

Actually, one pattern that's common is for the Captain to be benevolent but distant, and his Executive Officer to be a hard-ass.

Sean M. Brooks said...

Kaor, Mr. Stirling!

I should have thought of that. And we see that kind of set up in TAU ZERO, where the Captain became a distant, benevolent father figure, and his second in command and the chief constable became the tough ones making sure things got done right.

I also thought of the examples of the British and Japanese monarchies, where the sovereigns were distant and benevolent, and the PMs did the grubby day to day politicking.

Ad astra! Sean