Strange Titanic question

Charcoal (graphite) is kind of oily, and it adheres to artists’ paper well. So I would imagine it might be preserved if kept in a stable underwater environment like inside a safe. Out where the current is flowing, probably not.

I would guess that things like menus and other documents would not be printed on such durable paper, and they probably got scattered into the open sea as the ship went down.

Another good answer; thank you!

I’m a Titanic addict and have a number of books on the subject. The one I like best is Wyn Craig Wade’s The Titanic: Disaster of a Century.

Great book, and I’ve read it too. Also a bit of a Titanic addict here, by the way.

How are you on Walter Lord’s book, A Night to Remember?

I first read Lord around 30 years ago, after I had seen the movie (which is an outstanding film). I have a copy of it in my bedroom too.

My daughter was in Halifax a few years ago, on holiday with her boyfriend. I was green with envy when she told me about visiting the Maritime Museum there.

I’ve got a copy of the book; also, a copy of the movie.

My grandmother was 14 when the Titanic went down. She recalled reading the newspapers at the time. She has long passed, but my curiousity and her recollection of the disaster, filled in a lot of my questions.

Get to Halifax. In addition to being a great vacation destination, it does have that Maritime Museum, with Titanic artifacts, and the cemetery with Titanic dead. Plus, plenty of pubs where you can hear traditional music. (Apparently, I can play the spoons so well, that I’ve been invited back, anytime, to the weekly jam sessions at the Auld Triangle, on Barrington Street. Not easy to do from 3000 miles away, but I treasure the invite.)

Duly noted, thanks! :+1:

The berg may also have been lost in a superior mirage.

Thanks. I only saw the film once, and somehow i dont remember that scene.

I’m still glad I have never seen this film!

I have to agree. I liked the one big hit from the music, but not seeing the film seems to have been a good decision.

I mean, it wasn’t a bad film. It was definitely overrated, but that’s just by virtue of it being rated ridiculously highly.

I think this take deserves more (favorable) attention as I am inclined to agree: Cal gave the necklace to Rose. It became her property. He had no further claim to it. What really happened was, arguably, that Cal committed insurance fraud. He claimed the value of an item he did not own and perhaps did not even have an insurable interest in as Rose was not yet his wife, meaning he had no possible interest in her property.

And as far as @JohnT’s Rose-rage, in addition to the various other critiques levied, I must also note that Rose hardly took up valuable space in a lifeboat. In fact, as was noted in both the film’s dialogue and in the historical record, many of the lifeboats were launched at half capacity or possibly less. Even for a shipwreck without enough lifeboats, it was a terribly botched operation—and that’s saying something.

This is a technique I have not heard of before.

What annoyed me is that if Rose had been a Roger, cheating on Callie, Rogers would have been the worst sort of cheating cad, while Rose and Jack was 'romantic". But she was still cheating on her fiance.

You all have been a little harsh on Rose. I don’t think she either stole or actively took the necklace. It’s been a few years, but my memory on the sequence of events is as follows:

  1. Cal wanted everyone, and especially Rose, to think that Jack was a thief.
  2. Cal’s bodyguard slipped the necklace into Jack’s pocket just before they searched him.
  3. Finding the necklace on Jack was the reason he was taken into custody and handcuffed to the pipe in the security office.
  4. Cal put the necklace in the pocket of his coat.
  5. On deck, when Rose was cold, Cal (ever the gentleman) put his coat on Rose.
  6. After Rose jumped back on board, Cal realized, and said to the bodyguard that he put the necklace into his coat and then put his coat on Rose. (Gunfire ensues)
  7. It was only when the rescue ship sailed into New York that Rose found the necklace in the coat pocket.

Your memory is correct IMNSHO

She still cheated on her fiance. She also threw away a necklace that could have funded some great charity.

She was 17. Her family sold her to him to make up for her father’s failed fortunes. Her “fiancé” was in fact a physically and emotionally abusive groomer and child sex trafficker. There, I said it.

Oh, also attempted murderer. What he had his henchman do to Jack was attempted murder. Conspiracy to commit murder, too. So forgive me if I’m not going to rush to shout down his child bride for being “unfaithful” to him.

How? How exactly could a charity “move” a honking huge heart-shaped stolen diamond? You don’t just drop that kind of thing off at a pawn shop.