How did the English feel towards the designers of the Titanic after the disaster?

[Jim Currie]

I believe these are Lockyer's words. The writer of that piece knew Mr. Lockyer as they were both musicians. It is the story Lockyer told.

Would you please educate me as to why his attributions would not come from someone with knowledge of that ship and ocean liners in general?

"He (Lockyer) found employment with the White Star Line, a shipbuilding company located in Belfast, Ireland, which at that time was designing a luxury liner ship of which four models were to be built from the same plan: the Olympia, Titanic, Lusitania and Britinia ... The first of these ships to be completed was the Titanic;"

For a Start. Anyone with shipbuilding or ship owning knowledge would know that the White Star Company was not a Ship Building Company. They simply owned ships. The only people they would employ in Belfast would be crew for their ships. Harland & Wolff built the ships.
Obviously the author got his facts second hand. He either mixed them up or got them from someone equally ignorant of ships and shipping.
Titanic was not the first of the four vesels mentioned. She was the second of a planned series which included Olympic and Britannic. The Lusitania was built in 1904/06 by by John Brown of Clydebank, Scotland who built most of the Cunarders including the Queens Mary and Elizabeth right up until the 1960s. (I suspect that WSL were impressed by the Cunarder and based the plan of the Olympic class on her. Maybe not)

Jim C.

 

[Bob Godfrey]

Lockyer himself was real enough. He was running a small building firm in Hampshire in 1901 before the Olympic Class ships had been conceived and was sill running it in 1911 while the Titanic was under construction. While the ship was being fitted out and almost completed at the tail end of that year he was in the bankruptcy court. In 1913 he sailed for New York, and if anyone was pursuing him with pitchforks it would have been his creditors who had lost their money. In the ship's manifest his occupation was given as 'musician'. He is said to have graduated from the prestigious Guildhall School of Music in that same year, which would have required him to have been a student of the school for several years previous to that date, during a period when he was clearly otherwise occupied. As several of us have pointed out, his references to the Titanic are ludicrous and indicate total ignorance of the design of the ship and of the work undertaken by Harland & Wolff. It would be a waste of time pursuing that line of inquiry any further, especially when the 1911 census shows him to have been in Bournemouth building houses, not in Belfast fitting out the Titanic with imaginary luxuries.

It's obvious that either Lockyer or somebody claiming to have been well-acquainted with the man was 'a stranger to the truth'. If it was Lockyer himself who invented his own past then maybe he was a Walter Mitty character, maybe aiming to build a false but impressive cv prior to a new start in the US, maybe a bit of both. As for his achievements in the US, I can't comment on those but bearing in mind the obviously false claims about his background in the UK I'd want to investigate the possibility that the structures he built were actually designed by somebody else, an employee or an outside consultant perhaps. Whatever, he was certainly not a 'world famous architect' as the article quoted above would have us believe.

 

[Jim Currie]

So you're not English, Jim?

How on earth did you guess Bob?

I'm surprised that there are Londoners who can't detect a Scots accent unless you're sporting a kilt and a red beard. Perhaps they think that Connery, Nesbit, Connolly etc are English too "but from up norf sumware. 'ampstead, I s'pect".


Don't know about that one Bob. Last Time I was in the 'Smoke', I had a hard time finding anyone who could speak english. Lot of pseudo JA MAY CAAN, MAAAN though.

I too am reminded of a golden moment in film. It comes near the end of that great movie "Finding Forrester".
Sean Connery who plays the recluse author Forrester is leaving New York to go back home. His young pupil played by Rob Brown suggsts "So you'll be going home to Ireland then?" To which Connery furiously replies " Sh-cotland for God'sh Sh-ake!

I resht my caish!

Jim C.

 

[Bob Godfrey]

Serves Connery right, Jim, for playing so many Irishmen in his early films. Maybe the casting directors thought he really was Oirish? But of course whatever the role it was always Connery playing Connery, a specialism at which he excelled. And still the industry isn't saying "What we want for this part is a young Connery." Don't think, however, that we southerners haven't suffered too. Mention the name 'Dick Van Dyke' and watch any cockney turn pale.

 

[Bob Godfrey]

As an ancient Brit like me, Jim, you'll remember The Blood Donor:

Nurse: You'll be perfectly all right, Dr McTaggart is an excellent doctor.
Hancock: Dr McTaggart? He's a Scotsman! Oh, that's fine, they're all good doctors, Scotsmen. Yes, like engineers, you know, it's the porridge that does it. Right, aye, carry on Macduff.
(Enters surgery): It's a braw bricht moonlicht nicht the nicht. There's a bonnie wee lassie out there, hoots mon the noo.
Doctor (no accent at all): Do you mind sitting down there please, Mr Hancock.
Hancock: I beg your pardon for lapsing into the vernacular, but the young lady did say you were a Scottish gentleman.
Doctor: We're not all Rob Roys.

Now there's a Scots role that Connery couldn't have played.

 

[Jim Currie]

Good evening Bob.

Even a wizened old Teuchter like me cringes when I hear that dreadful effort from Mary Poppins. Committed opposite that quintessential English Rose Julie Andrews as well for God's sake. Must have been something to do with money. (Isn't it always).

As for the "Blood Donor" and all things Handcock... next to Old Willie S. himself... the man was one of England's finest. They don't make 'em like that nowadays. Come to think of it; nowadays, they don't seem to make people with what once passed for a sense humour. There is a sort of 4th form version. However it requires an inordinate amount of cussing, boobs, bums and carry-on- below the navel quality to be succesful. Personnally, I think that if wit were the nasty stuff, the purveyors of modern humour would be constipated. But then as you so rightly observe, I am an Ancient Brit.

What was Tony Blair's mantra? Ah yes! now I remember. Education! Education! Education! As they say in the vernacular "Aye, that'll be right pal."

Jim C.

PS. Thought I would share this with you and any other long-suffering slaves of the Politically Correct Brigade.

Last month I wrote a reply to an article on the BBC site. It was to do with the coming Scottish Referendum. In it I declared that I was proud to be called a 'Jock'. Also that I was well aware that in the past, many opressed people in dire distress had been glad to hear that The Jocks were coming. (Not south of the border pre 1604 I hasten to add.)
I was told that my article was racist and was subsequently removed from publication. Since we Scots are gentle, sensitive souls who could never be offensive I can only think that the description "Jock" itself was deemed so.
I wonder what they'll do to remove all sexist inference from a Jock Strap? The mind boggles.

Another PS. What the heck has this to do with how the English felt about the design of Titanic? (Sorry folks)

 

[James McRaney]

My question to you, James, is how did you come across this individual and why are you interested in them? I think it's important to recognize that the source of this information is not wrong, they are lying. This raises the question of who are they lying to and why?

I am doing a series of short videos that are histories and short biographies of people and places significant to the town of Picayune, MS which happens to be my hometown. Mr. Lockyer looked interesting. I've gotten to know Mr. Stockstill, 79, and I am inclined to believe that this is the story Mr. Lockyer told him. I haven't even mentioned any discrepancies to him thus far, of which there are many.

Mr. Lockyer may not even exist.

That he existed and reinvented himself as an architect, I am certain.

From http://picayune.ms.us/wp-content/uploads/oldminutes/minutes/1934.pdf:
ALLOWANCE FOR PLANS ON CITY HALL
On motion duly made and carried, it is ordered that Mr. Wilfred S.
Lockyer proceed with the drawing of plans and specifications for repairs and imp- -'.
,; rovements on the City Hall Building through the Civil Works Administration, with
the understanding that *ka* if said project is approved, he shall receive his pay
from said C. W. A., and in the event the project is not approved, he is- hereby
garanteed the sum of $100.00.

It has un-sourced claims presented in a way that a professional journalist would typically not present them, for example, the folklore about the rope (the phrasing "this particular rope" is particularly suspect). The article uses irrelevant facts to support it's reasoning, for example, that Lockyer being a devout Christian took the rope breaking as an omen. There is no particular reason why a devout Christian would consider random superstition any more than the average person, unless that superstition was actually related in some way to the religion.

Agreed. I've searched for any superstition involving ropes and boats and can find no reference. I believe Mr. Stockstill is recalling a first person account. He knew the man.

The writer gets the number of floors in the Woolworth Building wrong (claims 50, actual is 57). There is some terrible spelling in some of the articles I've seen on this.

I read this to mean that it was the first building to break the 50 floor mark. "Some" of the misspellings are because the original is a typewritten page typed out decades ago. Why reproductions weren't corrected, I can't say.

There's also problems with the proposed history of the City Hall building. The original was built on 1904 and was used until the Lockyer City hall building replaced it, except that the building was built on the same site. Where did the city conduct business when the old building was being torn down and the new one being constructed?

David Stockstill is the only person who seems to have any pictures of Lockyer on any site that I've seen.

On multiple sites with articles, the articles are obviously sourced from one person. I'd say that a lot of amateur journalists have been had by Mr. David Stockstill. The questions you should be asking are about him, not Lockyer.

Fortunately I am in a position to ask him. He's quite a gentleman and I am embarrassed to correct him. Either he was fooled or he was lying. I can't imagine a motive for lying and he really is a well regarded gentleman. Whether I ask him or not, I don't know. Either outcome doesn't seem nice and I really like the guy. My best choice may be to quietly table the Lockyer bio. I'm unsure.

 

[TimTurner]

James,

It's hard to say. There may well have been two Wilfred Lockyers. Or perhaps one was an imposter that read of the other and simply assumed his identity. Or maybe it was the same man who decided to start a new life. I wouldn't assume that its the same Lockyer without very strong evidence, especially since we know something is amiss. One might look at passports and census records, etc.

Whether David Stockstill is lying or only fooled, I can not say. I will say that for a historian, he has done a mediocre job of researching the Titanic and verifying his sources. Any substantial research into the Titanic should have revealed that it had only 2 sister ships and that there was no chapel. And that knowledge should have told him his sources on Lockyer were wrong.

If you want to break the news to Mr. Stockstill gently, I would begin by asking him for his sources and let the inaccuracies expose themselves slowly and unobtrusively. Nothing is more impenetrable by facts than a bruised ego.

One thing to say about local character - Lockyer may not be who he said he was, but he sure is interesting.

 

[Bob Godfrey]

I don't believe there were two Lockyers, except in the sense that there was a real one and an embellished version of the same. To proceed or to drop the project? Depends what you want to achieve, James. If you want to document the life of a famous architect with a Titanc connection, then drop it because Lockyer was neither. But as Tim stated he is certainly an interesting character for other reasons. To investigate that side of Lockyer's life you will certainly need to confront Mr Strickland with information that will not only conflict with his existing impressions of a man that he knew and perhaps respected as a friend but also of the quality of Strickland's own competence as a biographer. If Strickland has himself invented the fantasy elements then I'd have no compunction about that. If, as is more likely, it was Lockyer who lied then you might be causing distress to a presumably elderly man and for no important reason. Or he might simply take it in his stride and be grateful to know the truth. I agree with Tim that the best course would be to introduce the possibility of lockyer having a vivid imagination by stages and assess the reaction. Who knows, you might get a knowing smile and a comment like "Yes, that would be just like him!"

 

[Bob Godfrey]

Jim: Well, our asides certainly have not a lot to do with the matter in question, but who could object to a bit of banter that keeps two old far - er- fogies amused!

I checked out the word 'Jock' in the venerable Oxford Dictionary and find that the traditional meaning, dating back 500 years both north and south of the border, was 'a representative male of the common people', 'Jock' being favoured in Scotland and the north of England while 'Jack' was more often used in the south, as in 'Jack Tar' for a typical deckhand. The equivalent term for a representative woman was 'Jenny'. Much later the word 'jock' acquired other meanings including the obvious one of 'the male genitals' but that's not relevant. As we know, 'Jock' became best known on this side of the Pond as the generic term for a Scottish soldier and was used with pride by the Scots and rarely with any suggestion of negative connotation by the English. So of course it would be nonsense to suggest that the word is racist, any more than 'Tommy' for the generic British squaddie.

 

[Jim Currie]

Hello Bob.

Now that information about the origins of the word is very interesting. In south Argyll they still use the word 'Jeck'. However since the area in question was gaelic speaking in my grandfather's time, I suspect that was a lowland import.

Jim C.

 

[Bob Godfrey]

If we go back a few hundred years we find that anonymous English and Scots sailors were commonly referred to as 'Jack' or 'Jock' respectively, and in England a sailor was 'Jack' well into my lifetime. It might well have been the case in the British army too as far as the early c18th, when we have the first ducumented reference to the rank & file of the army as 'Tommy' (Atkins). Whatever, the Scots stayed with 'Jock'. The explanation most often given for 'Tommy Atkins' is that it was a name used in sample enrolment forms produced by the British Army in the c19th and used well into the c20th. That's true up to a point, but the Army didn't pick that particular name out of the blue; it had been in common use as a generic term for at least 100 years. The first element of the name might have derived from 'tommy' which was the name of the coarse brown bread which was the staple element of a soldier's rations. Maybe that's why the Scots didn't adopt the name, because as Tony Hancock pointed out they preferred porridge!