The Wager: A Tale of Shipwreck, Mutiny and Murder

Grann's new book is quite readable! I was very lucky to find a new copy, dust-jacket and all, in a little free library. It is a more straightforward story than that of Killers of the Flower Moon, and the thesis seems a little less pointed, but a quality read nonetheless.

Much of Grann's writing goes about recounting the differing perspectives of the survivors of the Wager shipwreck. The castaways, as they struggle with lack of food, shelter, and all the other needs, gradually break into factions and nearly lose their humanity. Grann explores, somewhat lightly, how quickly the bonds of brotherhood dissolve. He does not take much time to explore the things humans will do in these perilous situations. There are only a few passing references to cannibalism, for example.

I am not sure what Grann intended his thesis to be. Is it an exploration of the trials and tribulations of the crew? The personalities involved? That's accomplished quite well. However, in the final chapter, Grann writes this:

“After M___ returned to England, he published a forty-eight-page narrative, adding to the ever-growing library of accounts about the Wager affair. The authors rarely depicted themselves or their companions as the agents of an imperialist system. They were consumed with their own daily struggles and ambitions—with working the ship, with gaining promotions and securing money for their families, and, ultimately, with survival. But it is precisely such unthinking complicity that allows empires to endure. Indeed, these imperial structures require it: thousands and thousands of ordinary people, innocent or not, serving—and even sacrificing themselves for—a system many of them rarely question.”

I struggle to find Grann's point. The narratives of the people who survived a gruesome shipwreck, mutiny, months of hunger and strife are occupied in their writing with their survival, not the political thought of Empire? Wow, no shit. I also feel that Grann is looking at these folks quite clearly removed from time and space. The officers in this setting would have an interest in propagating empire, not curtailing it. Many of the officers would go on to be active players in developing the largest empire ever to straddle the Earth. Is that “unthinking complicity” ? No. It is, if anything, thoughtful abetting.

Grann clearly feels a need to address some elements that come up in the castaways' accounts, but I don't know if it works seamlessly. Grann frequently mentions that the written accounts come from Europeans with a European view, and that is a good and proper note. However, there is a relatively shallow examination of these contexts. I think there is a little more written about the press gangs at the start of the book than there is about the Kawésqar people later on. Perhaps in the paragraph I quoted above, what Grann seeks is not writing from the survivors on these topics, but from others. I don't know, and I don't know if he knows. I would have appreciated these things be better integrated throughout the story, rather than appearing in Chapter 26 and feeling somewhat tacked on — especially the paragraph above, which I feel has no precursor anywhere in the book. Perhaps the themes best captured across the full page count are hubris, social order in times of social collapse, and the time-tested want of militaries to engage in boondoggles.

This probably sounds negative, but I really liked the book! It does feel less congealed than Killers of the Flower Moon, and less capital-I “Important.” It was an engaging and itneresting shipwreck read though!


P.S.: I accidentally deleted the last two paragraphs of my review and they were so good. Please accept this hasty substitute. Shame on me for trusting the goodreads editor.