The Great Eastern Controversy

and pleasure. represents the turn of the tide toward redress for Russell. There are, however, a number of comments which provoke response from me. Buchanan claims that I do not offer a interpretation of the Great Eastern affair, whatever he may mean by that, then goes on to explain what such a general interpretation would now embrace: It is necessary to account for the troubles of the Great Eastern in a way which avoids the pitfalls of Rolt's explanation and the simplistic explanation involving the intervention of malign fate, he writes. Then he asks whether this can be done-as though it had not been done by me in my two books together with the article prompting this correspondence. That is quite a put-down and I am astonished, but no more astonished than when I find him going on to indicate lines of consideration for this new interpretation which are no more than a reiteration of points I have made in my books: such points as the unprecedented demands of a ship of unprecedented size, technically and financially; the exigencies of the Crimean War; the confusion of responsibility; and the reluctance (or lack of ability) to use the ship as was intended

Economics · Law and economics · Political science · History · History of Science and Medicine

• Prophets of Progress

  Edward J Gillin, Edward Gillin•Technology and Culture•2015

  Add to list

• Principle, practice and persona in Isambard Kingdom Brunel's patent abolitionism

  Open Access•David P Miller•The British Journal for the…•2008

  Add to list