One of my favourite Monty Python moments is Graham Chapman as a naval officer saying, in a very official manner —
“There is no – I repeat, no – cannibalism in the Royal Navy. And when I say none, I mean that there is a certain amount.”
I got to wondering whether besides being a brilliant bit of surrealism also is a more direct satire of something. Was there ever any sort of situation in which the Royal Navy was in the position of almost-but-not-quite-successfully-vehemently denying something? Say, the existence of same-sex sexual activity or something? Or drug use? Or alcoholism? Or racism?
Anyone around in that era know what might have been going on with the navy back then?
Mostly what they then referred to as “paederasty.” Which makes it extra ironic that Graham Chapman was the one denying cannibalism.
I believe that cannibalism did occur occasionally when crews were shipwrecked for long periods of time and some survivors eventually recovered. But I don’t think it was ever widespread.
This is a good question. I’ve always assumed that it was an oblique reference to homosexuality in the navy. Like Churchill said, “Rum, sodomy, and the lash.” Have any of the Pythons ever talked about it?
I thought the title refered to the Lifeboat sketch. Or is that immediately preceding the Chapman denial the OP refers to?
“Look. I tell you what. Those who want to can eat Johnson. And you, sir, can have my leg. And we make some stock from the Captain, and then we’ll have Johnson cold for supper.”
I always assumed the sketch was a joke on historical cannibalism in the Navy; that sort of thing used to happen in desperate shipwrecky type events. However, I never claimed to be the sharpest knife in the drawer.
There probably were instances of cannibalism when sailors where shipwrecked, but it was a very unusual event on the ship on which I served. No more than once a year. Well, maybe twice, but no more than that, unless we didn’t like what the cook had served. But that only happened every few weeks and not on a daily basis. At least not most days.
I read an interesting book - The Custom of the Sea which talks about shipwreck cannibalism in the late 19th century. Although they proposed drawing lots to see who would be killed, in reality they chose the youngest, weakest, and lowest-ranking person in the lifeboat.
I asssumed (perhaps wrongly) that cannibalism was merely a stand-in for homosexuality.
A LOT of Python bits used absurd phenomena as symbols for homosexuality- remember that documentary about men who secretly dress up as mice? Same principle.
Probably that, or a general comment on the way the Royal Navy deals with any scandal. I think there were scandals involving lashings and other punishments used at sea in the past.
I think it is a satire about how any large official organization deals with any sort of scandal, or hint of scandal. It is not really specific to the Royal Navy, or cannibalism, or homosexuality.
The “Mice” sketch mentioned by astorian, on the other hand, is a brilliant satire on attitudes to homosexuality (although it is also about attitudes to illegal drugs), and although you can understand and appreciate it well enough without knowing that Chapman was gay, it does take on deeper resonance when you know.
“. . . . . . . . So I think we should kill 'em.”