#tbh brantlinger seething over marryat probably increases his importance in this book

[marryat92]

Patrick Brantlinger's book Rule of Darkness: British Literature and Imperialism, 1830–1914 has been a great asset to me in examining themes of imperialism, racism, and colonialism in Captain Marryat's works, as well as placing him in his context of Victorian cultural and literary history. It's slightly dated at this point (originally published in 1988), but still very relevant.

But Brantlinger unfortunately treats Marryat as primarily a writer for children, and he also just hates the guy. He tends to read him without nuance, flattens the moral ambiguity of his stories, and at one point he refers to Marryat's literary colleagues who were also ex-Royal Navy (Frederick Chamier, William Nugent Glascock, William Johnson Neale, etc.) as his SEAGOING CRONIES. (I put the book down and started laughing, at that point.)

There is a light-hearted anecdote in The Life and Letters of Captain Frederick Marryat about Marryat having some improperly cured animal hides on display in his home, which then attracted insects, as told by his daughter Florence—who clearly loved her father but was not above making fun of him. (After angrily insisting that nothing was wrong, Captain Marryat finally admitted the problem and sent the infested hides to be treated).

Brantlinger assumes that it is "perhaps some satisfaction for the modern reader" to learn about this incident, which also cracks me up. Like, there was no need to include this in a literary analysis, but he is just filled with glee to think of some embarrassment happening to Marryat.