Discussion Groups / English Usage / November 2007

I was asked a few questions by "Robert Carnegie" in another group and rather
than crosspost and draw the ire of many, I thought I would repost and draw
the ire of many more.

I had asked James Follett, "Which true event did you base your book on, Mr.
Follett?" and Mr. Carnegie very wittily replied:

Aye, Mr. Carnegie, a lot of us heard stories from our dads, but now they are
gone we are hearing stories from all sorts of blokes, blokes like that James
Follett for example who can't seem to tell sh.t from shinola. (Interesting
phrase I learned during a joint exercise.) So, Mr. Carnegie, let me begin:

Being ex-RN I am upset with anyone who plays fast and loose with *facts*
concerning that service. Initially, I thought Follet had got his facts mixed
over two entirely separate incidents during WWII, the "Laconia" incident and
the "Atlantis" incident. (A quick Google will show the relevant details of
both.)

When he first posted his claim that his book, "Those In Peril", was based on
a true event - Doenitz asking Churchill to suspend hostilities during rescue
attempts - he was asked if this meant his book was based on the "Laconia"
incident where such pleas were definitely broadcast by U-boat commanders as
they attempted a rescue. Follett replied his book was *not* based on the
"Laconia" incident but was in fact based on the "Atlantis" incident and he
posted this URL for anyone interested:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_auxiliary_cruiser_Atlantis#U-68.2...126.2C_a
_Nightmare.2C_and_HMS_Devonshire

He was immediately challenged as to his claim about Doenitz requesting a
free passage for the rescuing U-boats in that episode, for the personnel
being rescued were all Kriegsmarine fighting men, and not the civilians,
POWs etc involved in the "Laconia" sinking. More than one reader commented
that it seemed very strange for the Germans to request that they be allowed
to rescue their naval troops in order to let them fight another day. Follett
claimed the appeal was ignored and again, as was said to him at the time,
"No wonder such an appeal was ignored *if in fact it was ever made*." Who in
their right mind would expect the British to stand off while U-boats
attempted to rescue 300 serving sailors of the Kriegsmarine? Follett claims
that all records of the request had been expunged from RN records, Public
Records Office records, etc., on the instructions of Churchill, but that
Follett himself had discovered a German archive containing a "motherlode" of
messages concerning the incident.

His claim that a reference to the episode can be found in Doenitz's memoirs
is untrue. There *is* a reference to the "Laconia" incident but Follett
claimed his book had nothing to do with that, and if you read "Those In
Peril" you will find many events which actually happened during the sinking
of the "Atlantis" also happen in his book. (e.g. - the Captain of the U-boat
being stranded in a bath on the auxiliary cruiser when the British suddenly
attack.)

I am still at a loss as to why Follett should try and change history in this
way. His book, "Those In Peril" is a quite good naval yarn and his claims
about its history and how it came to be written do not need the
embellishments he has claimed.

He himself has suggested I contact his publishers if I am unhappy over all
of this and says because I have not done that my arguments should be
dismissed. Why should I complain to his publisher? I have no complaint with
"Those In Peril", a decent and sometimes absorbing naval yarn. I *do* have
problems with the false claims made by James Follett over his claims
concerning alleged messages sent for "humanitarian" reasons during the
"Atlantis" incident and his claim that references can be found in Doenitz's
memoirs.

All along I have suspected that Follett mixed up the facts concerning the
"Laconia" and the "Atlantis" sinkings and got himself into this mix-up in an
innocent sort of way. However, his "innocence" disappeared with his post
saying his book was *not* based on the "Laconia" sinking, but was based on
the "Atlantis" episode. Why he made this false claim I do not know and only
he can explain.

I will persist.