Link: Was Captain Bligh really the jerk he’s been made out to be?
An interesting column. A slight nitpick though. The column states:
Bligh was the Governor of New South Wales, not Australia.
To be fair, at the time, “New South Wales” pretty much was Australia; the other Colony/States didn’t appear until 1825. But yeah, NSW =/= Australia, even then. Despite what people from Sydney will try and tell you. 
Of course, if we want to be ultra-pedantic, half the country at the time (the Eastern half) was New South Wales and the other half was a purely nominal claim by Holland known as “New Holland”. Given the lack of Windmills and Tulips in Western Australia I think we can all guess how that worked out in the end. 
Excellent report, but it states that “most movies” ignore Bligh’s feat of navigating his boat of non-mutineers 3700 miles. But the 1935 movie of “Mutiny on the Bounty” and the 1980s film “The Bounty” both DO cover this – it’s only the 1860 film that ignores it, so “most movies” actually do depict this. (It’s not surprising that the 1935 movie does – it’s based on the Nordhoff and Hall trilogy, of which the second volume – “Men Against the Sea” – is devoted to Bligh’s navigation of that boat.)
Bligh managed to be a maritime pain in the ass well into the 20th century. When the Exxon-Valdez oil tanker ran aground in Prince William Sound, it did so upon Bligh Reef, named for the Master of Captain James Cook’s third world voyage, and the future Captain of the Bounty, William Bligh.
Nice work Matt.
I have vague memories of Jack Paar trying to set the record straight when I was a wee lad. I’d never heard of Bligh at the time so it didn’t make much of an impression other than make me go out and read the N & H trilogy. Does anybody else remember this as an interest of his?
That’s one I must see. I believe it’s the first movie in Daguerreovision. 
Which is why I chose to reduce the complexities to Australia. At one point, I think I had said, “the colony that would become what we recognize today as Australia,” but cut that in the draft I sent to Ed.
I’ll ask for the edit to make it NSW, though, since that seems to be what the concensus here is.
Actually, is says “Most *stories and *movies,” not just most movies. There have been more movies than just the ones you mention. These are:
[ol][li]The Mutiny of the Bounty (1916) with George Cross as Bligh and Wilton Power as Christian. This was a silent movie from Australia, and no prints remain. What I was able to find out suggests that after the mutiny the mutineers sail to a tropical paradise and the loyalists disappear from the film.[/li][li]In the Wake of the Bounty (1933) with Mayne Lynton as Bligh and Errol Flynn as Christian. Bligh gets the men home to England, but no mention of how or how arduous the trip was. Another Aussie film, it was Flynn’s first film role.[/li][li]The Laughton/Gable 1935 film. Although Bligh’s voyage home is included, it also includes the horribly ahistorical trip back for revenge. The trip to Timor is also badly distorted. So you are right it doesn’t ignore Bligh after the mutiny, but it makes what Bligh does so wrong it may as well have.[/li][li]“Mr. Christian Seizes the Bounty (April 28, 1789)” (1956) an episode of Walter Cronkite’s You Are There series. Bligh sort of magically gets back to England with no explanation.[/li][li]Mutiny on the Bounty (1962) Trevor Howard as Bligh and Marlon Brando as Christian. IIRC, Bligh gets back after being put in the longboat, but how, where, or what happened are all left out. It’s been a while since I’ve seen this version, so I may be wrong about that.[/li][li]The 1984 Mel Gibson film, which as you say, does portray Bligh’s achievment well[/ol][/li]
Beyond movies, there are popular books, fictional representations, articles, etc. I think its safe to say that the most common summary of the story is something like: “The Bounty was sent to the South Pacific, the captain was a monster, the crew mutineed, they sent the captain away and sailed into paradise to live happily ever after.” The person that asked the question, for instance, did not appear to know about the voyage to Timor, despite knowing Bligh later was promoted.
Yer pushin’, PW, with that list. For most purposes, we can confine the movies to the three I mention. Those others are pretty obscure, or even lost.
As for other treatments, they don’t necessarily skimp on Bligh’s feat. Classics Illustrated adapted all three parts of Nordhoff and Hall’s trilogy, Including “Men Against the Sea”. So Bligh’s feat got a whole comic book essentially to itself
My own first exposure to it was a reprinting of Bligh’s own log, which I picked up from a department store in paperback (!), So I read Bligh’s firsthand account of the ordeal.
Walter Conkite and the Brando film are obscure?
Anyway, this is the first time it’s been said I’m pushing a point when listing exhaustively my sources. You also have to admit that your own first exposure is atypical.
Whatever, I’m not going to quibble on what does or does not constitute “most stories and movies.” It’s a question of personal opinion ultimately.
What I won’t back away from is the point I was making: Most people are unaware of what happened after Bligh was set adrift and what an astounding achievment the open-boat voyage was.
Ask any 100 people on the street what happened to Bligh after the mutiny and almost all of them won’t be aware of it. If they understand anything at all about post-mutiny Bligh, they think he went back to the South Pacific driven by personal vengance to pursue the mutineers, but won’t be able to tell you how he returned to England to get a second ship.
I just tested this on my wife, actually. She said she had “no clue” what happened to Bligh after the mutiny. One person isn’t any kind of sample size at all for a rigorous study, but I think she’s pretty representative of a well-read person that is not very interested in history.
Good report.
I have to say, being in charge when one mutiny breaks out is unfortunate. Being in charge when a second one breaks out is appalling.
Right – Captain/Governor Bligh may have been a great navigator, but he seems to have lack the personal relationship skills that are needed in a good manager.
People tend to go by the Laughton/Gable film as if it were gospel, when in fact the Gibson/Hopkins film was much more accurate, or at least it attempted to be.
Great report, PBW. I knew the bit abut Bligh’s amazing navigational feat after the mutiny, but I know I am in the minority.
James Michener wrote a book, Rascals in Paradise, about various colorful characters who made a mark, one way or another, in the South Pacific.
One chapter is on Bligh, titled “Bligh, Man of Mutinies” It does not attempt to sugarcoat that Bligh was no saint. “He was, unquestionably, a man with a terrible temper, prone to sudden storms of anger.” But this chapter, as well as telling about the open rowboat navigation feat, addresses Bligh’s family life. “His family loved and respected him, and he was to bring into the world six beautiful daughters who were devoted to him.”
It also goes well beyond the Bounty incident, telling much about the rest of his career(and other mutinies) Worth looking for if you find the subject interesting.
You’re still pushing. Walter Cronkite might not be obscure (actually, he might be these days. He hasn’t done the news in ages), but that show surely was. And I mentioned the Brando movie in my piece. And you’re only listing the sources exhaustively to try to reclaim the point.
I’ll grant you that most people aren’t aware of Bligh’s navigating feat (and that my experience is atypical), but it’s pretty clear to me that the three movies conastitute most people’s exposure to the story, and that saying that most stories and movies ignore Bligh’s doings is only really correct if you only count the 1960s film. That’s the only point I was disputing.
Bligh also commanded ships of the line in the battles of Copenhagen and Camperdown and was commended after both for his actions during the battles. His contemporaries appear to have thought of him as a good captain and an excellent navigator.
The Mutinies at Spithead and the Nore
In 1797, Bligh found himself once again relieved of command by his men. He also learned that his common nickname among men in the fleet was ‘that Bounty Bastard’. These two mutinies, however, were widespread, involved a fair number of English ships and were based on issues of pay and involuntary service for common seamen.
The Spithead mutiny did achieve some of its aims. The common sailors wanted better pay, better food and a dismissal of some of the more sadistic and brutal officers. All officers were sent ashore and the seized ships were run by committee.
Bligh became more directly involved in the Nore Mutiny. The Nore is a Royal Navy anchorage on the Thames estuary. This mutiny in the British fleet, just after the Spithead mutiny in 1797, failed to achieve its goals of a fairer division of prize money and an end to brutality. The Nore mutiny was led by Richard Parker, who was later hanged. About 30 others were also hanged but most of the mutineers were sent off to the prison colony in New South Wales.
Well, Spitshead anmd Nore were less about Bligh and more about the Royal Navy and he might not even have been involved had his ships been on cruises at the time.
In addition, his other troubles were magnified by the Bounty incident. His troubles in New South Wales were very much a part of an ongoing series of conflicts between a succession of governors and the oligarchic/plutocratic Sydney merchants and the supporting officers of the Corps. This is not to claim that Bligh’s personality played no role in the mutiny, but the mutineers very much made a point of claims associated with the Bounty when trying to drum up support for their actions.