I saw the movie before I read the books, and Stephen will always look and sound a little like Paul Bettany to me. O’Brian’s attempts to convince me of Stephen’s unattractiveness and grating voice have failed. I like the character so much that I simply can’t believe he would look repugnant to me, even with a greasy pork chop in his pocket, blood stains on his jacket and his scrub wig askew.
Ah, and that’s always the issue with movie versions. To you, Maturin will always look like Paul Bettany. To many of us who read the books first, Bettany is too good looking to be Stephen.
And I thought Russell Crowe was only so-so. But I’ve got a very high standard for my images of Jack Aubrey.
I saw the movie before reading the books, and Crowe looked very fit. In most of the books, Maturin goes on and on about how corpulent Aubrey is becoming. I picture someone who is at least 50 pounds over ideal weight, but I guess I could also write it off to Maturin just being a mother hen.
Since I also saw the movie first, that was how I pictured Jack and Stephen when I began reading. However, with the frequent mentions of Jack’s corpulence, my mental picture of him has since morphed into a pudgier version of Crowe, with longer and blonder hair.
IIRC, Russell Crowe had intially gained more weight to play Aubrey, and the director (Peter Weir) thought it was too much. I’m assuming that since they fiddled around with the timing of the story (in order to make the French the villains and not the Americans) they went for a younger, healthier JA – in his prime, you might say.
I used to need to have a book "on the go " or one I was just about to start somewhere in the house just as badly as a smoker needs the reassurance that theres a packet of cigarettes close at hand .
The Hornblower series got me into Nelsonic sea stories and so I tried several times to read an Aubery/Maturin book but found the language too flowery and too many themes not relevant to the plot.
I complained vehemently about how poor the writing was to all and sundry and was sceptical when a librarian told me how popular the series was .
And then one wet Sunday in an empty house and not so much as charity circular to read I had another attempt …
Couldn’t put the book down ,I came to realise the sheer genius of O’Brien on so many levels ,with romance ,adventure and humour intertwined ,the characters acting and thinking as people of the Georgian age, rather then being contempary to us but dressed in "period"costume, which many authors are guilty of today .
Since that day I’ve read and reread the whole series many times over.
I consider him to have been one of the great authors of the English language"a rare plucked 'un" ,Austen and Dickens “aint in it”!
I always had day dreams of meeting up with him in the south of France and chatting with him about the series over a few vino’s but never ,got to meet him something I’ll always regret.
I think it unlikely we’ll see another writer of his calibre and individuality in our lifetimes.
I’ve just started on this series - in fact I just finished Master and Commander yesterday. I am enchanted. And looking forward with glee to the fact that I have so many still to read for the first time! I think I am going to enjoy them a lot more than Hornblower, who I found an increasingly unattractive character as the series went on.
Two things I still don’t know please - what is meant by (1) the weather gauge: and (2) to “wear ship”?
Quite true. I think it was Gore Vidal who wrote, “The past is another country.”
You’re right, of course, but I couldn’t figure out why I had “bishop’s chair” stuck in my head. Then I remembered - a month or two ago I was looking at online images from the New York Public Library, and came across one that I loved and that is pertinent to this thread.
Here it is. You may have to enlarge it. Chair the bishop!
I always envision Stephen looking a lot like O’Brian himself. O’Brian’s image is on the dust cover of some of my volumes, and he was a spare, homely, shrewd looking cove, probably with “meager hams”.
What a cove you are, Stephen! 
Both are explained further at Wiki, but basically weather gage is having the wind in your favor.
And to wear ship is an older term for jibe, which involves turning the stern through the wind so that the wind is on the other side, instead of turning the bow into the wind (tack).
Remember please that I was born and raised over 1000 miles from the ocean and my nautical ignorance is exceeded by few.
Bobo defined the terms but didn’t really mention their significance in the series/sailing naval warfare.
The key thing to realize in sailing is that it is impossible to sail directly into the wind or closer to the wind’s than approximately 30-60 degrees (depending on vessel and rig). Square riggers had even more difficulty pointing upwind than today’s sailboats. To sail upwind, one has to “beat” to windward (zig-zag toward the wind) as close to the wind as the vessel can sail, which is much slower than sailing dowinind.
Very often two opposing ships (or fleets) might not want to fight, particularly if one is be weaker than the other. The one seeking to avoid the fight may turn around and try to run, resulting in a chase. If the chasing ship is upwind of the retreating ship, the chasing ship is considered to have the weather gauge. In that case, the chasing ship can relatively easily turn downwind to attack its prey. Although a faster ship could possibly escape if it has enough searoom downwind, the upwind ship is in a significantly better position if it wants to force an engagement.
On the other hand, if a ship wanting to escape is upwind of its pursuer, it can relatively easily sail upwind, and the pursuer would have to beat upwind to make up the distance the retreating vessel is to windward.
This plays into the difference between tacking and wearing ship (modern term for wearing is “jibe”). If you have the wind blowing on one side of the ship, and want to turn so it is blowing on the other, you have two options – you can either turn the ship so that the bow of the ship crosses the direction of the wind (to tack) or you can turn so the stern crosses the direction of the wind (to wear or jibe).
If you tack, there will be a long time where the sails will not be drawing because the ship is pointing in the zone upwind where it is impossible to sail. If the ship has enough momentum, it can turn through this zone, and pick up the wind on the other side. If not, the ship will “miss stays” and essentially stop with the wind blowing all of the sails and rigging back (modern term, “caught in irons”). It can take some time and seamanship to recover from this condition.
On the other hand, when you wear, the wind passes behind the ship, and the sails will be producing thrust for the whole time. This is much easier on the crews and rigging than tacking for square-rigged ships, and you don’t have the risk of missing stays. However, if you are generally headed upwind you have to turn downwind – away from the direction you are heading – to wear, which takes time and slows your upwind progress.
In short, when heading generally upwind, tacking is faster and riskier while wearing is slower and safer. (In most modern “fore and aft” rigged sailing vessels, it is reasonably easy to tack, but jibing can be risky because the boom securing the base of the mainsail can move quickly and violently across the vessel when the wind catches the sail on the other side.)
Billdo, thanks for that clear and succinct summary! I understand better now!
Thinking it over, I just realized something amiss in the title of the movie. Jack is supposed to be “Master and Commander” of the HMS Surprise. But the Surprise is a post-ship, being a frigate, and, indeed, Jack is seen to ship a swab on each shoulder, a sign of a senior Post Captain, not a Master and Commander.
I am such an O’Brian geek. :o
My favorite scene from the series is the escape from Boston in, I believe, The Fortune of War.
‘Damn my petticoats,’ said Diana, and jumped He received her full-pitch with his good arm ‘No one could call you a light woman, Diana,’ he said, setting her down among the bait-pots and the pervading reek of decaying squid, and then blushed in the darkness ‘Come on, Stephen,’ he called. There were wagons moving along the quay, and several lanterns, voices out on the harbour, bobbing lights.
‘Jack, have you a piece of string in your pocket? I cannot climb down without doing up my parcel.’
‘Poor lamb,’ whispered Diana, ‘he is still half asleep.’ She sprang up the side like a boy, took off her shawl, wrapped the papers in it, tied the corners, and tossed it into the boat.
‘We shall get off some time, I suppose,’ said Jack, more or less to himself, shipping the rudder. And when at last they were down, ‘Diana, stow yourself right forward and do not get in the way. Stephen, there are the rowlocks: pull right ahead. Give way.’ He shoved off; the Arcturus’s side receded; Stephen made several effectual strokes.
‘Boat your oars,’ said Jack. ‘Clap on to the halliard -no, the halliard. God’s death - haul away. Bear a hand, Stephen. Belay. Catch a couple of turns round the kevel- the kevel.’
The scow gave a violent lurch. Jack dropped all, scrambled forward, caught two turns round the kevel and slid back to the tiller. The sail filled, he brought the wind a little abaft the beam, and the scow headed out to sea.
I just assumed since they took the most material from “Master and Commander” as well as “Far Side of the World”, they chose those two books for the movie title. Plus, the first book would be the most recognizable name in the series, and I can’t think of anything else they could call it without conjuring an entirely new title.
I also saw the movie before reading the books so Paul Bettany will always be Stephen Maturin in my mind, not that I mind terribly. I’m sure I’m bias, but despite the fact that he’s too pretty, I thought Bettany captured Maturin’s demeanor quite well. I remember in the “Making of”, Weir commented that if he translated the characters too literally to the big screen, it might of turned out too comical in a way, since Aubrey is a big chubby guy and Maturin’s a shriveled little guy.
Rutger Hauer and Dustin Hoffman.
Alan Hale, Jr. and Burgess Meredith
Fie, Sir.
My seconds shall call upon you in the morning.
Indeed, Sir, I cannot
Imagine Meredith killing two French agents and desposing of the bodies by giving them to a naturalist to be dissected. 
Having spent the better part of the long weekend in bed with a cold, I’ve now read straight through the 4th and 5th books in the series.
#4, The Mauritius Command was okay, although the battle scenes tended to blur together after a point. Capt. Lord Clonfert was a fascinating character study.
#5 Desolation Island–Not much battle during the voyage to Botany Bay, but lots of incident with the gaol fever (smallpox?) and the ship nearly sinking. I’m sorry we didn’t get to meet Capt. Bligh. I took to Mr. Herapath and hope he’ll show up again later on in the series.
I only just started on #6 when I couldn’t sleep last night, but it looks quite promising, beginning with a wombat eating Jack’s hat:
It occurs to me that many of my favorite scenes in these stories involve animals: the previously discussed sloth, Jack’s first sight of the Lively’s gibbon swinging on the masts, the diffident aadvark Stephen is introduced to at the Cape. O’Brien has a way of describing their behavior that edges on the anthropomorphic, but seems perfectly natural.
I’ve always thought that Brian Dennehy was the physical type that I thought of when I imagine Jack Aubrey.
And people, remember that it’s O’Brian, with an A.