Why is Lightholler's account of leaving seen as questionable?

[SunnyDay]

On the point of PTSD, I think it was mentioned in Titanic Voyager by Patrick Stenson that later in life Lightoller had a panic attack after running a cold bath on a hot day. After stepping into the cold water it took him straight back to fighting for his life in the North Atlantic.

All the best

Michael

I noticed a couple of the accounts talking about how awful it was seeing the greenish water coming up the steps. I suspect water was a trigger for many people

 

[Michael H. Standart]

Plus the questioners don't know how to question without damaging memory

I think this misses the point. Memory damages itself without any outside help. It's constantly changing so the fresher you can get it, the better.

 

[SunnyDay]

I think this misses the point. Memory damages itself without any outside help. It's constantly changing so the fresher you can get it, the better.

Youre right it does. There's ways that it can be further damaged though

 

[Jenna Offerty]

I agree with the previous comments regarding Lightoller wanting to protect his shipmates. I find it plausible that he felt the inquiries were leveling suspicion, judgement, and skepticism at the crew, looking for somewhere to put the blame, and he wasn't interested in it being him or his fallen colleagues. I imagine wanting to maintain his career with WSL somewhat factored into it, as he was a practical man, but it was far lower on his priorities list than many think.

Regarding the original post's question, I get the feeling a lot of people think that as Lightoller said the ship did not break, he was clearly lying about it, therefore anything else he said is also suspect. (I firmly believe that he genuinely believed the ship went down intact, but that's another subject!) The account of being sucked under and then "blown up to the surface" does sound perhaps far-fetched, but it's not really when you think about his location on the ship and what was happening at the time. Gracie was in the same location, and his account is not dissimilar.

 

[SunnyDay]

I agree with the previous comments regarding Lightoller wanting to protect his shipmates. I find it plausible that he felt the inquiries were leveling suspicion, judgement, and skepticism at the crew, looking for somewhere to put the blame, and he wasn't interested in it being him or his fallen colleagues. I imagine wanting to maintain his career with WSL somewhat factored into it, as he was a practical man, but it was far lower on his priorities list than many think.

Regarding the original post's question, I get the feeling a lot of people think that as Lightoller said the ship did not break, he was clearly lying about it, therefore anything else he said is also suspect. (I firmly believe that he genuinely believed the ship went down intact, but that's another subject!) The account of being sucked under and then "blown up to the surface" does sound perhaps far-fetched, but it's not really when you think about his location on the ship and what was happening at the time. Gracie was in the same location, and his account is not dissimilar.

So is it the sucked in and blown out part that makes people suspicious? I know that I few people disbelieved how he's got to the lifeboat but idk why

 

[Arun Vajpey]

I get the feeling a lot of people think that as Lightoller said the ship did not break, he was clearly lying about it. I firmly believe that he genuinely believed the ship went down intact.

I don't believe that Lightoller was consciously lying when he testified that the Titanic did not break; at the same time, I do not think that he "genuinely believed" that the ship sank intact because on the upturned Collapsible B, he would still have been quite close to the ship at the time of its break-up. I believe that in common with several oter crew members who testified similarly, Lightoller saw some aspects of the break-up but did not believe the evidence of his eyes. While they might not have considered the Titanic as 'unsinkable', the idea that a ship like that could actually break into two major pieces would have been almost beyond belief.

 

[Scott Mills]

I don't believe there is anything wrong or even questionable in Lightoller's survival per se. As a human being, he had every right to save himself if he got the chance after Captain Smith gave the "Every Man for Himself" order. Lightoller left the ship after that order and took his chance when he got on board the overturned Collapsible B along with others. Just like Ismay - albeit under different personal circumstances - in saving himself Lightoller did not deprive anyone else of a place.

Having said that, I have mentioned my own personal opinion - and that only - that Lightoller subconsciously did not expect to go down with the ship. I am not saying that he had any specific plan in mind to save himself but IMO people like Lightoller and Lowe come across as those with a strong survival instinct. Nothing wrong in that; I suspect I have a similar instinct for survival myself.

What was really questionable were Lightoller's often vague, ambiguous and inconsistent statements during both official inquiries and thereafter, including in his biography. He gave the impression of being a good "company man" and making sure that he future career was not too adversely affected.

Indeed, this is a problem from the point of view of history and accountability; and the worst part is that his loyalty to White Star got him nothing. Not one of the four officers who survived Titanic's sinking were ever given their own command with White Star.