What exactly is it that predisposes some people to be heroes and some cowards? Is it the full panoply of ‘little boys don’t cry’, ‘trials of strength’ and a suitable diet of ‘boy’s own heroes’ that ensures little boys grow up to remember that they should stand on the deck of their ship until all the passengers have left?

It seems odd to me, that in these days of ‘you are what you are born’ – witness the relaxation of homosexual legislation, and the drive to ensure that adopted children can find their natural parents, that we should still cling onto the notion that little boys can be nurtured into ‘real men’ – prepared, in the words of Rudyard Kipling:

‘To stand and be still

to the Birken’ead Drill,

Whilst all around them, other human beings – aka ‘women and children’ – are fleeing for their lives.

Women and children first is a noble tradition, and as a woman, and ex-child, one that I am dutifully in favour of; but I am not surprised that having made a catastrophic, and probably criminal, navigational decision, Captain Shettino of the Costa Concordia should have behaved in a manner that is now being universally described as ‘Cowardice’. Very few people’s failures to live up to job expectations are that public, even those soldiers who were shot for desertion or cowardice in the face of the enemy weren’t subjected to the knee jerk commentary from every media monkey and social networker in the Western world.

We have some magnificent men and women in the armed forces, who are rightly fêted for their bravery – however, they have self selected for a role of daily facing death on behalf of others, I am not sure that the Captain of a cruise liner actually believes that he might be required to stand on the metaphorically burning deck and sacrifice himself.

In an ideal world, Captain Shettino wouldn’t have ‘fallen’ into a lifeboat, wouldn’t have needed to be castigated by the coastguard for deserting his post, wouldn’t have run crying and wailing into the arms of the chaplain; I’m sure the families of those who have lost their lives are rightfully angry with him – but does it really befall the rest of us to complain that someone failed to be a hero?

If it does, had we better not reinstate ‘hero values’ in every schoolchild, male and female; train them not to cry, spank them when they misbehave, insist that they continue their task even when cold, wet, tired and dispirited, on the off-chance that we might expect them to  be a hero one day?

We can’t have it both ways. Particularly since I suspect that the reaction might not have been so extreme if Captain Shittino had been female – although I have no doubt in that case that the media would have been calling for a return of ‘real men’ as ship’s captains!

How much of the, in particular, Italian social media reaction can be attributed to a lingering sense of disgrace regarding their behaviour during the Mussolini years, and the yoke of stale jokes hung around their neck ever since – pace ‘The Italian Book of War Heroes’, a useful source of blank pages on which to note the planting dates of your cabbage plants – and the feeling that Shattino had opened the door to another few decades of derision, is difficult to judge.

Is there even the slimmest evidence that the outcome of the disaster would have been affected one jot by his presence on board or not? On board but unconscious? Trapped somewhere and unfound? How about trapped and managed to release himself at the last moment, emerging triumphant as the last man to jump ship – might that have left him just facing the criminal charges of negligence over his original mistake, but without the unpleasant undertones of most of the hysterical coverage? (‘Seen hours beforehand dining with a beautiful woman’ is a personal favourite of mine – there would be outrage on any cruise ship if the tradition of the captain’s table, which guests vie to attend and dress up in their finest, was not observed – for some it is the highlight of their holiday).

The man made a catastrophic decision which has taken many lives and ruined others – he should be judged for that, and convicted if guilty – but I have an uncomfortable feeling that we have appointed him an icon of another age, and that he will actually be tried for all manner of things – ‘dining with a beautiful woman’, ‘emptying the safe’ (I believe it is supposed to be the captains duty to do so if possible, and don’t they normally carry a gun these days?) failing to uphold the tradition of the Birkenhead, being a weak and fallible creature who went into panic mode when the full enormity of what he had done hit him, and generally being a product of the modern age.

How do you train a man to be a hero these days?

Mike January 22, 2012 at 17:18

Maybe I’ve missed it but nobody seems to have made the point that the
captain of a merchant ship is responsible for the safety of a ship, its
passengers and its crew. It doesn’t mean he has to be a hero, just do his job.
He knew what his job was, he didn’t do it. I can only base my opinions on the
media reports, but I suggest that others were negligent in the performance of
their duties, else the salvage teams would have not found the bodies of
lifejacketed passengers at muster stations. An officer should not have left a
muster station while there were passengers on their list unaccounted for. Has
anybody seen if any ships officers were casualties as well?

Brian January 22,
2012 at 16:45

Captain John Konrad (gCaptain blog) posted this excellent piece last July. Well worth reading.

GildasTheMonk
January 22, 2012 at 12:47

I appreciate Jeremy Clarkson divides opinion, but when he puts his mind to
it he can make a very respectful documentary. His documentary on the VC and
the type of man it takes to win it is in my opinion well worth a watch. The
first episodecan be found here
http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=jeremy+clarkson+victoria+cross&oq=jeremy+clarkson+v&aq=0&aqi=g10&aql=&gs_sm=c&gs_upl=1493l7323l0l10265l17l16l0l7l7l0l291l1894l0.4.5l9l0

Elena ‘andcart
January 22, 2012 at 09:12

How do we know he didn’t trip and fall into a lifeboat? And how was he
supposed to get back up the ladder when everyone was coming down it?
Lets
have some fair play, I say.

Radical Rodent
January 21, 2012 at 23:16

Anna R: “…made a catastrophic, and probably criminal, navigational
decision…” Catastrophic, yes; criminal, very much doubt it, though I do
concede that there may be local regulations broken; stupid – definitely!

Microdave: “… the second in command should have over ruled Shettino…” erm,
no. The Captain (more correctly, the Master) of a ship cannot be overruled,
merely advised; even with a pilot on board, the Master still has command and
all responsibility for the ship. And therein lies the rub – the Master of a
ship holds what I (and Zaphod) think to be a unique position, in that he is
the sole person holding full responsibility for the ship, its cargo, all
persons on board, and for the environment around the ship; I know of no other
job where one person holds that much responsibility.

I have my own ideas for how this happened, but wait to see if the final
investigation confirms them. However, it really all boils down to training,
which has become very lax, now; many companies seem to rely upon “training by
checklist,” rather than ensuring that everybody is properly trained in the
more rigorous methods used in times not-so-long past for the rank they
hold.

As for emptying the safe – highly unlikely (unless it was for his own
pocket!), as most of the contents, if the safe is recovered, will not be
seriously damaged, and will dry; also, though it may be many thousands of
dollars, that is as nothing compared with the loss of the ship.

All in all, I think Westerlyman sums it up best in his final paragraph.

john malpas January 21, 2012 at 22:56

If the captain had contrived to die would that make people feel
better?
If you want men to be brave or even duty bound bring back 1914 at
least and above all ditch feminism.
Otherwise it is survival of the
survivors.

JuliaM January
22, 2012 at 07:04

He was at very little risk of dying. That’s the rub.

Brian January
22, 2012 at 15:41

A return to the age of Adniral Byng, pour encourager les autres?

Johnnyrvf January 21, 2012 at 22:41

Sorry that should be http://niklowe.blogspot.com/

Ex-Capitano
Schettino January 22, 2012 at 15:39

Don’t-a worry. We all- a make – a da mistakes.

Johnnyrvf January 21, 2012 at 22:36

If you go to http://nicklowe.blogspot.com/ there is a very interesting
video taken from the actual automatic navigational transmissions from the ship
about the last hour or so of the voyage; it would appear that the captain did
his best to beach the ship after he realised how serious his manoeuver had
gone wrong, the commentry suggests he was in control of the ship until he had
steered it onto the ledge; in looking at how he placed the ship in its final
resting position one gets the impression he had a good idea of the coast line
and how his ship steered.
I think he did panic, but in my opinion his
efforts to beach the ship in the way he did probably saved a lot more lives
than have actually been lost and whilst his professional conduct both BEFORE
and AFTER the ship grounded is completely lacking and despite his appalling
descision to manouever the ship close to the shore and the sloppiness of his
mastery he did manage to reduce the collateral damage quite significantly.

Westerlyman January 21, 2012 at 21:27

I am given to understand that the drill has been modified to ‘families
first’ as the logic goes that children need both parents. I am not sure who
would come next but as a grandfather I expect I would be at the bottom of the
list.

I also think that the captain displayed cowardice. I cannot think of any
plausible explanation why a professional seaman of senior rank would even
consider leaving a stricken vessel before all the passengers and junior crew
have been evacuated.

JuliaM January
22, 2012 at 07:03

It’s also because keeping families together avoids panic.

C H Ingoldby
January 21, 2012 at 21:02

I don’t like the media much and I especially don’t like media bandwagons,
but when the captain of the ship left in a lifeboat before all his passengers
and crew were off and then refused direct orders to return to the ship then
the media criticism is actually a fair response.

It is not asking for great and outdated standards of heroism to expect the
captain of a ship to stay onboard until the evacuation was complete. This was
no Birkenhead situation where he was at risk of sacrificing his life for
others, at the worst it was going to be a cold swim.

Zaphod January 21, 2012 at 20:05

Perhaps the Captain got a new satnav for Xmas, and didn’t change it from
the default “dinghy” option. Like these big lorries that get stuck in small
streets cos the satnav is set for “car”.

Seriously though, the Captain of a ship has much more power (and
responsibility) than almost any other individual. Personally, I find him
guilty of cowardice until evidence shows otherwise. I don’t know offhand of
any other occupation I would say that of. I could be wrong.

The media are having a feeding frenzy. For once, I’ll allow them their
fun.

Moppy January 21, 2012 at 19:29

The historian and novelist Allan Mallinson, quotes a discussion with an
Italian officer. The officer asks Mallinson to list five great British
military leaders, he then replies that there are no Italian equivalents since
the time of Christ. He then says “You cannot believe how dispiriting that
is.”.

Perhaps it is just the way they are?

Saul January 21, 2012 at 18:13

For those not familiar with the origin of, The Birkenhead Drill.

http://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/WomenandChildrenFirst.htm

Brian January 21,
2012 at 18:09

Reminds me a bit of of Conrad’s Lord Jim. It will be interesting to see if
the Captain does the decent thing and redeems himself in some distant corner
of the world doing good for the locals.
Courage and cowardice are forks on
a road. Until the junction is reached we can none of us know how we will act.
As Lord Moran famously wrote everyone starts off with their bank acount of
different amounts of courage which is spent at different rates according to
each person. There comes a point when even the bravest find themselves
overdrawn in circumstances that wouldn’t faze the meekest characters. Finally,
courage can be simply a lack of imagination.

Andrew Duffin
January 21, 2012 at 17:20

“had we better not reinstate ‘hero values’ in every schoolchild…train them
not to cry, spank them when they misbehave, insist that they continue their
task even when cold, wet, tired and dispirited… ”

Well, it would be a start.

Ancient + Tattered
Airman January 21, 2012 at 18:57

Indeed it was service doctrine in my day.

Mudplugger January 21, 2012 at 16:05

Can’t help wondering if your phrase “emptying the safe” is a euphemism for
what he hoped to do after “dining with a beautiful woman”……

M Barnes January 21, 2012 at 15:51

I have been in a situation that required steady nerves and concentration of
a team of people to make sure nobody died. One of the team ‘froze’ – he didn’t
react to instructions and had to be moved off his job to a less critical one.
He wasn’t a coward and I wasn’t a heroine – we simply reacted in different
ways to a dangerous situation at that time. I have nearly always reacted so
but I froze once when I was looking at a loved one in a nasty situation – mind
went blank!

We all like to think we’ll react calmly in perilous situations but I’m not
sure we know until we’re faced with it. And my personal experience makes me
think that we have it in all of us to be both coward and hero.

The media are gorging themselves on this story. It’s all a bit hysterical
isn’t it? It’s like he’s become a lightening rod for – what???

Engineer January 21, 2012 at 15:36

A hundred years after the Titanic, and we still can’t make unsinkable
ships.

Was the ship carrying a Pilot, and if not, why not? Did the navigation
officer say to his boss, “Er, think we should turn left a bit or we’ll be
quite close to rocks according to me chart”?

If Schettino went AWOL after the initial collision, did anybody else try to
take some sort of command? It seems from survivor reports that some seamen
didn’t know how the lifeboats functioned.

Is culpability limited to the Captain, or are the problems more systemic?
The cruise company seemed very quick to leap to judgement on the captain’s
actions, but what of their procedures and training? (It’s all his fault Guv,
nuffink to do wiv us.)

Many questions…..

M Barnes January 21, 2012 at 16:14

All very good questions and there will be a marine accident investigation
by professionals who will look at just those sort of systemic issues. None
of that makes a good headline though and certainly won’t sell many
newspapers or fill hours of talk-radio time. Far more fun to leap to
conclusions and form a mob.

microdave January 21, 2012 at 18:21

“Was the ship carrying a Pilot, and if not, why not?”
I was
under the assumption that a pilot is only required for navigation within the
confines and approach to or from port? The Concordia was on a routine
sailing between two ports, and should have been several miles from the many
islands nearby. I have watched the video mentioned in Ed P’s comment and
observed that the ship was heading directly towards the small island at 15.6
knots, and only began to turn at the very last moment. The sheer bulk and
inertia meant that it broadsided into the rock outcrop, sustaining major
damage.

I find it unthinkable that the company didn’t know that regular close
passes to this location had been going on for some time (as many reports now
claim). Even if this manoeuvre was a one-off, the second in command should
have over ruled Shettino before things got that out of hand. Similar
problems have occurred in the aviation industry when senior captains have
been making mistakes for years, and more junior first officers were
reluctant to challenge them. There are now recognised procedures to prevent
this.

Even the most basic GPS will automatically create an electronic log of
its movements, these should be downloaded and checked by head office, if for
no other reason than to ensure the most economical routes and handling are
observed. Fuel isn’t cheap any more.

The fact that an army of individuals can now easily monitor shipping and
commercial aircraft from their own homes ought to remind those in charge to
be more careful of their actions.

Brian January
22, 2012 at 15:36

Cutty Sark and HMS Victory are pretty unsinkable although the former has
required extensive fire-proofing work and the latter has many trip hazards –
I nearly went flying from the same brass plate on the deck that caused
Nelson to fall down in 1805 – two centuries and still waiting for a capenter
to inset it flush.

Châtelaine January 21, 2012 at 15:30

I agree with Anna that “vada abordo, Cazzo!” should be held responsible for
his totally irresponsible decision to take the route too close to the rocky
coast. Reading other blogs and forums, I cannot escape the feeling that PR
assistance to the company [Clarence Mitchell of all people …] is pushing the
“coward” card in trying to sail safe from being ultimately responsible for an
incapable captain.

Anna
Raccoon January 21, 2012 at 17:08

Clarence?
I know you wouldn’t kid me, Chatters, bloody hell, that is a
diverting piece of information! Explains a lot…Thank you

Châtelaine
January 21, 2012 at 17:40

You’re most welcome, Anna

Châtelaine
January 21, 2012 at 17:46

You’ll recognise the mealy wording, I’m sure, Anna.
This is e.g.
reminiscent of “for operational reasons” …
—
Clarence
Mitchell, who is representing Costa Cruises, said: “Mr Foschi confirmed
the captain had been approaching the island of Giglio to ‘make a
salute’.

“The company says this (incident) was caused by an attempt by the
captain to show the ship to the port.

“But there’s a criminal investigation going on and we’re not going to
say anything that’s going to compromise that or the captain’s
case.”
—

JuliaM January 22, 2012 at 07:00

It’s a dangerous game to play, though; the more they paint the
captain as a total disaster waiting to happen, the more it begs the
question ‘why didn’t you sort him out sooner?’…

Peter Melia
January 21, 2012 at 22:23

There was a ship called “Marion”, a Greek cargo ship in the North Sea.
The captain had a brand new chart of the area, but he didn’t want to use
it, he used his old, tatty, comfortable chart. Which wasn’t fully
corrected, (marine chart issuers regularly publish “corrections” for their
charts, to reflect any changes which have taken place). In the North Sea,
there was an oil rush, and rigs and pipelines where all over the place.
The chart people kept up to date, corrected to suit and issued
corrections. But out Greeko skipper’s 2nd mate hadn’t done his job (it’s
one of the 2nd mate’s jobs). So when the ship dropped anchor it was right
bang smack in a “no anchoring” area, and the anchor, of course (sods law)
landed right bang smack on a pipeline, breaking it, resulting in pollution
and excitement.
Well the case rumbled on and on, the Greek owner had
good lawyers, so when the court found the OWNER and not the captain,
directly responsible for the incident, they appealed to the House of Lords
(ah, those were the days!) on the grounds that the owner couldn’t possibly
be responsible as he had been on holiday with his family on his own Greek
island at the very time it all happened. The Good Old House of Lords would
have none of that nonsense. The rejected the appeal saying, in effect,
that as Owner, he was ultimately responsible for the misdeeds of his
captains, since he should have ensured that they were in all respects
equipped sufficiently well to be able to carry out their job safely and
with due respect to others and others property, etc. This included keeping
keeping the most up-to-date charts on the bridge, kept properly
updated.
Well you might ask, what has that to do with the price of
fish?
The ruling has never been challenged, so that now, shipowners are
legally fully responsible for the consequences of actions of their ship’s
officers.
(En passant, when I told my foreign owners of this ruling it
scared the very merde out of them and they quickly ushered in a very
strict chart correction regime on their ships.)
I guess there is no
individual owner of Carnival cruises, or is there? Isn’t it still a
privately owned company? Whatever, at very least it will have a CEO, or
equivalent, who might in the near future be facing some time of enforced
absence from his workplace.

Demetrius January
21, 2012 at 15:15

During the First World War, the Italians fought well for what was a scratch
Army. The Alpini, notably, were a determined and capable force. In the Second
World War they simply did not have the kit and the logistics were terrible. As
was the General Staff work. This was down to the politicians and the
General’s. Courage without bullets, food or water is not enough.

Spiral Architect
January 21, 2012 at 14:45

Story from German high command in 1940 – Hitler was told that Italy had
joined the war, ‘Send two divisions’ said the Fuhrer. When told that the
Italians had joined the war on Germany’s side, he added, ‘Shit! Send
nine!’

Schettino is not only an Italian, he is a Neapolitan……….he probably bought
his captain’s ‘ticket’ – and I am not joking.

Richard B January
21, 2012 at 14:23

I think talk of heroism is missing the point. No-one is required to be
heroic – just to do what is right. We used to teach children that they should
always do the right thing, and not always put themselves first. Perhaps the
emphasis on self-realisation and entitlement has eroded this.

Ensuring that the passengers evacuated safely was simply part of his job,
and one that he failed to do. He chose his own safety over that of others,
when he was paid, and had a moral duty, to do the opposite. That makes him a
coward in my book. For an alternative approach, where the danger was far more
immediate and life-threatening, look at Capt Sullenberger on Flight 1549 – he
kept a cool head, landed his plane in the most challenging circumstances, and
then walked the length of the plane twice to make sure no-one was left behind
before climbing off. True heroism. No-one died in that incident, and if
Schettino had behaved differently, maybe no-one need have died in the
Concordia.

Mick Turatian
January 21, 2012 at 13:01

Churchill, so he is quoted, liked Italian cruise ships for three reasons:
excellent food, excellent service and, in the event of an emergency, none of
this nonsense about women and children first.

MTG January 21, 2012 at 14:46

^
This tragedy is too fresh to excuse even your bad taste, Mick.

Biographers credit him with many witty quotations but Churchill was never
sober long enough to coherently splutter half of them. The World’s greatest
coward and second greatest War criminal may have many sick admirers ,
sufficiently Churchillesque to brand this Captain ahead of the findings of
any Inquiry.

Peter Melia
January 21, 2012 at 21:53

What on earth are you talking about?

ivan January 21, 2012 at 22:06

You, of course, have irrefutable proof of your accusations – if not,
then you are lying and showing you are foolish.

Bob January 21, 2012 at 23:12

Please have the decency to explain this comment. On face value, you are
accusing Churchill of cowardice and being a war criminal, and also of
always being drunk.
Please enlarge on this and give some evidence other
than your own malice and hatred.

Frankie
January 22, 2012 at 01:40

@MTG

Churchill may possibly have ‘liked a drink’ or two… on occasion, but
is this now a crime?

To describe him as a war criminal and of cowardice is ludicrous and
foolish.

To quote the great man himself: “I have taken more out of alcohol
than alcohol has taken out of me”.

Finally, Churchill may sound a bit odd, but he’s doing his best… not
many dogs do as well as him trying to sell car insurance!

Cheesey
January 23, 2012 at 16:45

Didn’t Churchill order this?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Fotothek_df_ps_0000010_Blick_vom_Rathausturm.jpg

I also heard that he would scarper back to Blenheim palace most
nights.

John77
January 24, 2012 at 15:01

Winston Churchill made his name for courage in battle prior to, and
as a basis for, going into politics. His early career features him
volunteering for combat roles, including Omdurman where he was part of
the 21st Lancers who charged, and eventually defeated, a force more
than six times their number. When he was dumped from the Cabinet he
pushed the limits of the Army Act to get a front-line posting as an
officer on the Western Front.
Blenheim Palace was where his cousin,
Jack Spencer-Churchill, Duke of Marlborough, lived. Presumably Jack
home went most nights.
To call Winston Churchill a coward, as MTG
did, is so ludicrous as to demonstrate stupidity.

MTG January 25, 2012 at 19:53

The aristocracy dressed in military finery to the adoration of
plebs who did most of the the bleeding and dying. Churchill was never
placed in danger but John77 may believe what he will.

John77
January 27, 2012 at 09:35

MTG should go and read a War Memorial occasionally – the mortality
rate for officers was higher than for other ranks.

Cheesey
January 23, 2012 at 16:58

The French described this act by Churchill as one of mass murder

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Mers-el-K%C3%A9bir

I think I’d agree with the French.

Bunny
January 27, 2012 at 14:02

Yes but a very powerful ready made navy in the hands of the Germans
is also unthinkable, so thank God he authorised it.

Mrs Turatian
January 22, 2012 at 10:30

The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride
it, but in the end; there it is, Mick.

Mrs Turatian
January 22, 2012 at 10:34

Oh and stop using the names Ivan, Peter, Bob and Frankie, you naughty
boy.

ivan January 23, 2012 at 11:29

And why should I stop using the name I was given at birth, pray
tell?

JuliaM January 21,
2012 at 12:53

“How do you train a man to be a hero these days?”

Do you need to be trained at all? Ask John Smeaton…

JuliaM January 21,
2012 at 12:50

“…I am not sure that the Captain of a cruise liner actually believes
that he might be required to stand on the metaphorically burning deck and
sacrifice himself.”

When I trained (in another capacity) for emergency evacuation of a large
terminus I really didn’t imagine that I ever actually would need to. But then,
that’s what the training was for and that’s what the job entailed!

As someone over at ‘Harry’s Place’ put it, they could understand (and
forgive, at least partially) the captain losing his shit if a kraken rose from
the briney depths, but not for something he should have practiced and drilled
for….

This wasn’t the Atlantic in winter, he was at very little risk of dying. At
most, he was at risk of a dressing down and wet socks.

gladiolys January 21, 2012 at 13:08

Agreed… and his job, surely, included the care and safety of his
passengers, as well as his ship? Therefore it was his job to make sure they
were all taken offboard securely, before he could leave.

No-one was asking him to be a hero, just to do his job. I think he should
have been stoic, rather than heroic.

Ed P January 21, 2012 at 12:46

Schettino, pronounced skett-eno.
Richard North at EU Referendum has a
link to an experienced captain following and deconstructing the detailed
course of the fated ship.