h2g2 The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: Earth Edition

Entry: The Sharpe Novels by Bernard Cornwell - A5212874
Author: Emmily...Nothing artificial added - U190758

I won’t bore you with the details of this Entry’s long and complicated journey to PR (it’s much older than the date shown) I’m just glad it’s finally here

I suppose I should mention parts of it are from a Flea Market rescue.

I’ve read and re-read it so many times my heads spinning, and I’m bound to have missed numerous grammar and punctuation errors, my apologies in advance for that.

All suggestion and comments welcome

Emmily

Hi, Emmily!

This looks really good! I've read the earlier Sharpe novels, and I think this gives a real flavour of the whole series.

A few more general points:
In the introduction, you say:
"Bernard Cornwell wanted to write a land-based version of C S Forester's Hornblower, he tried to think of a name for his main character that would be as dramatic as Horatio Hornblower."

I don't think that really sets the scene enough for people who don't already know all about Hornblower. Adding something like this would help:
"Bernard Cornwell wanted to write a land-based version of C S Forester's Hornblower, a fictional hero in the Royal Navy during the Napoleonic Wars. He tried to think of a name for his main character that would be as dramatic as Horatio Hornblower."

"Copies of Sharpe's Battle published after the success of the TV series are dedicated to Sean Bean, with the words Sharpe's Battle is for Sean Bean in recognition of Bean's portrayal of Sharpe."

I think that's a bit confusing--it makes it sound as if only some copies were dedicated to Bean, and earlier ones weren't. Also, I don't think you need to list the words "Sharpe's Battle is for Sean Bean" separately, since that's what a dedication normally includes. I'd cut that sentence down to:
"Sharpe's Battle, published after the success of the TV series, is dedicated to Sean Bean in recognition of his portrayal of Sharpe."

The layout of the Special Publications section is confusing.
--You give the publication of Sharpes Skirmish (book) in 1998 and 2002
--then the publication of Sharpe's Christmas (book with two stories) in 2003
--then the publication of Sharpe's Christmas (story) in the Daily Mail
in 1994, and of Sharpe's Ransom (story) in the Daily Mail in 1995.

While the novels are arranged in chronological order, you've already taken these 3 short stories out of the main sequence. I think it would be much clearer if you put the three paragraphs in publication order:
--Daily Mail stories first 'Christmas' 1994, 'Ransom' 1995
--Then the WH Smith special publication of 'Skirmish' 1998
--Revised and extended 'Skirmish' 2002 Sharpe Appreciation Society
--Combined 'Christmas' and 'Ransom' 2003 Sharpe Appreciation Society

I'll give the later sections a more detailed read later. It's looking good so far!

Azara

Cheers Azara

I've gone with your first two suggestions and changed the Entry accordingly.

The third about the Special Publications, hmmm they're not part of the main section of novels because they are different. (Short stories - Skirmish has only 63 pages and Christmas only 97 pages) I don't see how I can put them in the order you suggest, and still keep the information about how the short stories came to be, which I think is relevant and of interest. I'll take another look later, see if I can re-wrod it somhow, without losing any of the information.

Emmily

Here's re-arrangement as I suggested, which I think keeps all the information.

"As well as the novels, Cornwell has written three short stories about Sharpe. In 1994 the Daily Mail requested Cornwell to write a short Christmas themed Sharpe story. They required a story of 12,000 words which could be split into three 4,000 word sections to publish in their newspaper over the 1994 Christmas holiday. Cornwell obliged with Sharpe's Christmas, set in 1813 after Sharpe's Regiment. This was repeated for the Christmas holiday in 1995 with Sharpe's Ransom, set 1816, during the peacetime after Sharpe's Waterloo.

Sharpe's Skirmish (Richard Sharpe and the defence of the Tormes, August 1812) was published in 1998 for WH Smith. Only one thousand copies of this limited edition were produced: it was a promotional initiative, where a free copy was given with every copy of Sharpe's Fortress. There were numerous problems including other booksellers' complaints that they did not have free copies.

In 2002, The Sharpe Appreciation Society published a revised and extended edition of Sharpe's Skirmish. In 2003, they published Sharpe's Christmas, which contains revised and extended versions of the two Daily Mail short stories: Sharpe's Christmas and Sharpe's Ransom."

How does that look?
Azara

Ok you win that looks just dandy, Thank You Azara.

I'll make the chages as soon I have posted this.

Emmily

This is a very comprehensive Em! You must be exhausted after compiling it!

The only thing I'm having trouble with is the openeing paragraph. Reading it, to me it sounds as if Richard Sharpe moved into an apartment in 1980...

Other than that, great work...it's HUGE!

MJ

MJ

It's taken the 7 of us, and the combination of 3 different Sharpe Entries to get here.

I'm not sure if it's made the first para. clearer, but I've change a 'he' to Cornwell.

Emmily

Forgot the last bit

It's taken the 7 of us, the combination of 3 different Sharpe Entries and about three years to get here.

Emmily

It's clearer to me, but others might sugest a different rewording Let's see who might mosy on by eh?

MJ

Great piece of work Emmily

Now for the buts...

First a typo "Simmerson calls Sharpe a bastard son of a pheasant whore." - I'm sure that's a peasant whore.

My problems lie not with your writing about Sharpe, but about the merging of fact and fiction. Sir Arthur Wellesley is a real person, not just a fictional character, but he is listed alongside fictional characters with no differation.

The 95th Regiment were also a real regiment, and after The Penninsular Campaign and Waterloo, they were renamed the Rifle Regiment, thus being saved from being dis-banded. The concept of devolved authority, adopted by the regiment, remains the basis of the British Army today, and the role of the modern infantry man developed from their tactics in the field. After Waterloo several books were published by members of the regiment listing their actions on the continent, and several of them became quite well known.

In any British Regiment an NCO had to be able to read and write, this was a requirement, and promotion through the ranks was becoming more commonplace by the end of the war - especially in fighting regiments.

I guess I'm saying that you have to be careful where fact and fiction merge.

Good work.

got to say congrats to you Emmily forgetting this into PR after such a long slong...hope it gets picked soon!

Spotted one typo though in the bit about sharpe the soldier it says this at the moment,


Wales' Own Volunteers they were recognised by numbers. accompanied by Sergeant Patrick Harper and the crack squad of riflemen from the 95th Rifle Regiment.

the bit 'they were recognised by numbers' obviously comes from the footnote attached to the word 'Volunteers' other than that its looking almost finished!

McKay & Cardi-Bling

McKay, I'll change the layout a little so I can (hopefully) make fact and fiction a bit clearer. There was a link for 95 Rifles, I lost it somewhere in the changes I'll put that back.

Cardi-Bling, I think that's the same bit Sho has mentioned the the EGWW thread, I'll take a look at it, see what I messed up there.

Emmily

Hmmm I'm still not happy with the para. Sho & CB mentioned.

It also had fact and fiction mixed. I may try to work it so that it's under a new Subheader 'Sharpe's Regiments' and seperate the fact from fiction...I'll give that some more thought.

Emmily

Hmmm Sho & Cardi-Bling, or anyone else familiar with the Sharpe novels could you help me out please.

Despite assurances to the contrary, I think this Entry is too long (it's over 5,000 words) and I am concerned it will get cut during the Editing process. I'd rather cut some now, than risk that.

I've already cut Teresa's section. If there's any bits (for want of a better word) that can be cut, without loosing the essence of the Entry please let me know.

I think this can be removed from Harper's section:

>"Harper finds it difficult sometimes to see where his loyalties should lie; with the British who have his homeland under occupation or Ireland, his native land. Harper decides his true loyalties are to Sharpe and the 95th Rifles."

Agree or disagree?

Emmily

I agree - especially in that the original 95th regiment were two thirds Irish and Scots, the ones who faced more difficulties (in real life, not the books) were the Americans.

I think Harper's character is such that he would have difficulties whatever higher loyalty he sought to adhere too (take the problems with his Catholic faith.)

I don't think you need to trim the entry for size, you're covering a large number of novels - possibly growing - and some real history too. Don't worry about the size.

I've been looking at a couple of sections.

You say:
"The 95th Rifle Regiment were based on a real regiment; the 95th Rifle Regiment. After The Penninsular Campaign and Waterloo, they were renamed the 95th Rifle Regiment,"
This is confusing--if they were renamed, wouldn't it be with a different name?

More importantly, you say:
"Sharpe was most at comfort when in command of the 95th rifles. Which included Rifleman Hagman, an ex-poacher believed to be the best shot in Wellington's army."

This makes it sound as if Sharpe was in command of the whole regiment, and obscures what was an important plot point in the early books, that he was in command of a small group of the 95th Rifles who got left behind when the rest of the regiment returned to Britain. One of the big problems for Cornwell in taking Hornblower as a model was that navy captains had much more room for independent tasks than army officers had: having Sharpe away from his own regiment made his various independent manoeuvres a little more plausible.

I think it would be better to say:
"Sharpe was most at home when in command of his small detached group of the 95th rifles."

I stopped reading the series at Sharpe's Waterloo, so I'm not familiar with the ones set earlier. I notice that in the section about Lady Grace Hale the titles are quite confused: I don't know if the confusion was Cornwell's (while he was good on military detail he wasn't always very accurate about other things!) Her husband is called both "Lord William Hale" and "Lord Hale"--he should have been either one or the other. If he was Lord William, then his wife was Lady William; if he was Lord Hale, then his wife was Lady Hale. She would only be Lady GRace Hale if her father was a Duke/Marquess/Earl. If the confusion was Cornwell's then it would be worth footnoting ""Cornwell's use of titles was occasionally inaccurate by the standards of 1800."

Also about Grace, it's not clear from the entry why they didn't marry.


Azara

I would not worry too much about cutting it down. I know its a long entry but I don't thing that there are really many areas of padding most of the text is necessary information. I've re worded the Sharpe's Service Record and Regiments paragraphs a little if you want to use it..


In Sharpes day the regiments were not officially known by there names instead they all were officailly recognised by a number. The name of any regiment was much was closer to being a nickname or was just used for ease of reference. Therefore Cornwell made up a number of Sharpes regiments although some such as the 95th were real regiments.

Sharpe served in the 33rd of Foot and was promoted in India to become an officer of the 74th of foot. He later joined the 95th Rifle Regiment and when Sharpe, accompanied by Sergeant Harper were split from the 95th at the retreat to Corunna (Sharpes Rifles) he joined the light company of, the South Essex which later became the Prince of Wales'Own Volunteers. Sharpe joined the 33rd as a Private was promoted to Sergeant after Sharpes Tiger and finished his army days as Lieutenant-Colonel in Sharpe's Waterloo.


As for Azara's point about the 95th, I agree that paragraph is too wordy perhaps you could change it to simple read,

Sharpes fictional 95th Rifle Regiment are actual based on the real 95th Rifle Regiment who served in The Penninsular Campaign and Waterloo and still exist in some form today. It was the 95th Rifle Regiment that developed the many of the battlefield tactics still used by the modern infantry.

McKay

Looking again there's very little I can remove, and there's still fact and fiction mixed with Wellington's section, that I need to sort out.

Azara, yep, I've messed up that first para you mention, I'll sort it.

>"This makes it sound as if Sharpe was in command of the whole regiment"

As an officer Sharpe was in command of whole Regiments, and Battalions. The 95 Rifles started off as a Comapny of 30 as I recall. The Rifles, either the 95th or 60th were attached to the South Essex or light Company. I'll see how I can make that clearer.

Lady Grace, my mess up there Sho contributed that section, and I thought I was being logical by scanning the book and finding Lord Hale's first name, not knowing there was a difference between Lord William and Lord Hale, no wonder it confued Cornwell. On second thoughts, I'll check the book to see if that is Cornwell's error.

>"Also about Grace, it's not clear from the entry why they didn't marry."

Sho, can you help out here I would've imagined that they couldn't marry as Grace was a Lady, and Sharpe not a 'gentleman' but the reason appears to be with Grace.

Cardi-Bling

I'll use bits of your suggestion. This sentence "The name of any regiment was much was closer to being a nickname or was just used for ease of reference." I think may confuse, rather than clarify, as I don't recall any Regiment nicknames being mentioned in the novels.

***Can someone please advise me, should - Regiment, Battalion, Company, Rifles etc and officer titles start with a Capaital letter.***

Emmily

I've changed that muddled paragraph, and changed the 95 Rifles link, hope this is clearer.

"The 95th Rifles were based on a real regiment of the era: the 95th of foot. After their heroic actions in The Peninsular Campaign and Waterloo, they were renamed the 95th Rifle Regiment, thus being saved from being dis-banded. The role of the modern infantryman was developed from their tactics in the field."

***Is the term 'of foot' correct? it's used in a few places after the regimental number***

Emmily

Of foot is OK, but they were renamed to The Rifle Brigade.

Regimental titles should be in capitals, as should officer ranks, however I don't think non-commisioned ranks are capitalized - however, I'm prepared to be persuaded.