Captain's Log, April 30, 2014 from the Rebel Heart Blog

[weavis]

Originally Posted by oldragbaggers

I was very quick to jump on the bandwagon to defend Eric and Charlotte in the beginning. And considering the viciousness of the attacks that were leveled at them I would do so again. And I am very sorry for what their family went through, no doubt traumatic. But since then I have mostly been watching and listening, trying to get a more complete picture of what actually happened, and haven't had a lot to say about it.

I made a lot of quick assumptions in the beginning that, with what has come out since, I think were a little overly generous in the credit I gave them for their preparedness and expertise, and the overall readiness of their vessel. But, be that as it may, a lot of people with less knowledge and preparation, and less suitable vessels, go out there and make out just fine, largely a factor of luck and good (weather) timing I think.

I think what we are seeing here is the arrogance and hubris of youth. I don't for a moment think that they don't realize that they made mistakes. (At least I hope they do....because, if they don't, they are likely to repeat them.) But, they spent years before the departure holding themselves out as examples of sorts, actively promoting themselves in all kinds of ways on social media and through their website. I have seen some of Eric's past posts and articles which, while not egregious, at the very least sometimes were condescending to others who he felt were less than competent, knowledgeable, or skilled than he. I think some of those people now, and others who defend them, may be just a little touchy over the lack of humility being shown in the aftermath.

Humble pie can be a hard dish to swallow, harder for some personalities than others. I think some of us would just have so much more respect for both of them in this situation (don't get me wrong, I am not by any means saying I don't respect them) if they would just show a little more humility and even just the slightest allusion to something they could have done better or differently, the fact that maybe they overestimated or underestimated one factor or another, that one decision or another could have been better or more timely, or even just (GASP) wrong. Anything at all that would indicate that there has been some introspection that would say that if they were to get another boat tomorrow they would go about it in a different way that would lead to a higher probability of better results.

My hope is that, even though they aren't able to bring themselves to say it publicly, that in the privacy of their own relationship they are having honest discussions about the errors that happened and the lessons they learned from them, that they make honest assessments of their limitations and abilities, and apply those lessons and assessments to their next endeavor. And I hope there is a next endeavor for them.

You are really a very sweet person Becky.

Without commenting on any of the topic, It has been my experience that people are what they are. If you dont see change, if you dont see an attitude shift, of you dont see nothing.................... then nothing has changed. It cannot be done in private. It has to be out there for all to see. Im not talking about minor personality quirks, Im talking about dangerous overconfident and censorious attitudes with a lot fo self denial.

If some one did something that required change, and refused to acknowledge that error or attitude or ANYTHING........... then my relationship with that person is the casualty. If they cannot see it, then I dont want them around because the next incident will involve ME and that is not good.

Back to the topic.. Nice post.

[mbianka]

I was struck by the photo that appeared with Charlottes article. If you did not know the back story it looks like they and their rescuers were just having a lovely cruise. Or maybe they were just glad that they would be getting off the boat.

[rebel heart]

Originally Posted by mbianka

I was struck by the photo that appeared with Charlottes article. If you did not know the back story it looks like they and their rescuers were just having a lovely cruise. Or maybe they were just glad that they would be getting off the boat.

We were all on the boat for ~36 hours. After the first day my daughter stabilized. Honestly, I think keeping spirits up was critical both for us and for the rescue men. I was running on an hour or two of sleep per night for several days at that point and kept it up for days further. The rescue guys were all away from their families on a leaky boat in **** weather. We were about to lose our home, and we had no idea what was making our child sick.

Even if liferaft survival classes that teach you that keeping your spirits up and having a good attitude is usually the difference between life and death. We never got to survival conditions, but keeping a positive attitude was something I tried hard to foster.

[robert sailor]

Becky I agree you are a sweet person and being judgmental is not something you can be accused of. I also like the way you dealt with your own position, very mature attitude, if I could only be as well mannered!

Write off the arrogance and condescending attitudes of these young folks as just being immature. My Daddy used to say that Getting older is inevitable but growing up is optional!!

[SaltyMonkey]

They have now overexposed themselves.

They need to work on the basis of their issues which aren't on the boat, nor in sailing or those skills. This must be done with introspection and self criticism and maturity.

Until they do, they're deluding themselves and will just create new problems and issues that will require rescuing.

As much as I've been supportive in the past on here, this is my conclusion.

SaltyMonkey

[cwyckham]

Originally Posted by weavis

You are really a very sweet person Becky.

Without commenting on any of the topic, It has been my experience that people are what they are. If you dont see change, if you dont see an attitude shift, of you dont see nothing.................... then nothing has changed. It cannot be done in private. It has to be out there for all to see. Im not talking about minor personality quirks, Im talking about dangerous overconfident and censorious attitudes with a lot fo self denial.

If some one did something that required change, and refused to acknowledge that error or attitude or ANYTHING........... then my relationship with that person is the casualty. If they cannot see it, then I dont want them around because the next incident will involve ME and that is not good.

Back to the topic.. Nice post.

I'm not ready to jump to any conclusions about the nature of people I've never met based on what information they've been willing to put out there. It is possible that people are right and they think that they are god's gift to sailing and don't think that they made any mistakes during their first long passage as a family. Given the number of mistakes I make (and will admit to readily) in a weekend dawdle in my home waters, that seems a bit unlikely to me.

I also find it striking that the same people who criticize RH for putting too much information on the internet before they were crucified publicly for living a life many of us live or aspire to live, now don't think that maybe they have learned something and are filtering a bit.

Remember that many people called for their children to be taken away because they supposedly recklessly endangered their lives. This type of thing actually happens.

Here are some thoughts that may or may not be relevant, but would certainly cross my mind:

The abandonment was because the baby was sick. The mistakes that were made would mostly be about boat set-up, maintenance, navigational decisions, or any number of things that had nothing at all to do with the abandonment.

Any admission about the prep of the boat or decisions made at sea may be seen as strengthening the reckless endangerment argument, even though it isn't directly relevant to the sickness of the child or the necessity of the rescue.

Regardless of what he actually thinks, it is far better for him to portray things in a certain way, or at least be silent on certain things for a while to allow things to blow over in the press. He can then choose his own way to talk about things if he so chooses.

He owes us nothing. His concern should be with his family.

[captain58sailin]

A general comment about humility. The ocean has the power to humble anyone, and if you do not approach the ocean with the right combination of humility and confidence, you will be doomed. Whether or not someone shows their soft side here, where folks have been so kind, understanding, and non judgemental, is a personal choice. It is easier mentally, if you give yourself up to your own demise as inevitable, then you can relax and enjoy the ride. Like sex, after the first time, you die it gets easier and easier.

[Spleen]

Aren't they in their mid-30s? Mid 30s + arrogant + hubris + immaturity = train wreck. (Or maybe = sunk boat is more apropos here)

(My formula that I just made up).

Mid 30s isn't THAT young. But, yes, it is the time that you either start maturing if you are a late bloomer or you are going to start causing problems for everyone around you. It's a tale as old as time.

It is a time to start developing WISDOM, which I don't believe either of them have any of...

For example-- stating how free of a lifestyle you have and attempting to demonstrate that with a photo of the crew who rescued you is not wise because it shows that you are not free at all, but rather a victim of a situation in which others had to come bail you out. You are very much a pawn in a large scale operation---- pawn = not free.

If someone can't figure out that the photo he/she posted with an article he/she wrote completely contradicted the words he/she said then you know, maybe that person isn't going to learn. Maybe that person doesn't want to learn.

It's not wise to not want to learn, and it is a poor choice to decide in his/her 30s that there is nothing more to learn in life. That you know everything and everyone else knows nothing. What a recipe for disaster! What a mark of immaturity!

Yes, life is a risk, but any good gambler will tell you (shout out to Kenny Rogers): "you gotta know when to hold them, know when to fold them, know when to walk away, know when to run...." Risk and gambling and taking chances isn't about just jumping into it... Proper risk management requires critical thinking skills, homework, attacking thought processes from all angles, inputting various information, and using your wisdom to make a good decision. It also means knowing when you messed up and learning from your mistakes..

Now, the big question I have is: if they didn't have insurance on RH, I imagine they now would want insurance on their next boat. Regardless of if RH had insurance or not, who is going to take a risk on them next time and insure the next boat? I sure as hell wouldn't take it on-- they aren't worth the risk.

As for the child endangerment concepts-- honestly, if that hasn't come to pass yet, it's not going to. I personally don't feel that is anything to worry about...


ETA: if one wanted to take Charlotte's idea of "living a life of quiet desperation" literally (from the article where she said something to the effect of most people on the hard live lives of quiet desperation as opposed to her life of magnificent fullness)...... Maybe we could define "quiet desperation" as living on a boat in the pacific (quiet) and desperately wondering if anyone is going to come rescue your family.... S thus perhaps it is possible to also live a life on a boat in quiet desperation.

[deckofficer]

Spleen,

From your post it is fair to say that you just don't know Eric or Charlotte very well. You do have their age correct at mid 30's. When I was that age, did the same thing with less experience, solo from Long Beach to Mulege. The only reason I didn't try to cross was I didn't at that time know how to celestial navigate and this was before GPS.

On this cruise I met many families, and those children were just amazing. Kudos to Eric and Charlotte for wanting to be a close family. In just 5 years the girls will be 6 and 8, pretty much perfect for long term cruising. It is my bet that they will return to the cruising life at a not too distant date.

Maybe on a catamaran???

[Spleen]

I'm not committed either way to whether or not they should have taken kids this age on a crossing. I wouldn't have been comfortable with it for us, and we are a medical family. (which could be why we wouldn't)

They did have some practical issues with the baby like her rolling around the berth where the lee cloth wasn't enough because she is so small. Things they didn't anticipate, and we have already discussed.

And, of course, their bad luck (or whatever you want to call it) with her illness.

The poster before me mentioned CPS/child endangerment issues that various posters have brought up on various boards. I was responding to the idea that they may not be speaking of faults and mistakes out of fear of charges.... Responding that I don't really think there is a real danger of that happening. Their children look clean, happy and healthy and Cora seems very sharp, so I don't think there is a CPS issue here.

[mbianka]

Originally Posted by rebel heart

We were all on the boat for ~36 hours. After the first day my daughter stabilized. Honestly, I think keeping spirits up was critical both for us and for the rescue men. I was running on an hour or two of sleep per night for several days at that point and kept it up for days further. The rescue guys were all away from their families on a leaky boat in **** weather. We were about to lose our home, and we had no idea what was making our child sick.

Even if liferaft survival classes that teach you that keeping your spirits up and having a good attitude is usually the difference between life and death. We never got to survival conditions, but keeping a positive attitude was something I tried hard to foster.

A good point. I once had a date with a woman (complete sailing novice). She met a guy with a boat who thanks to sleep deprivation managed to sink the boat while they were underway. They took to the life raft. She was in it for two weeks. One day he said he was going for a swim, went over the side and she never saw him again. Two days later she was picked up by a cruising couple who just happened along and spotted the raft. Indeed an optimistic attitude is an important factor in life and survival situations. Lucky for me that my high school classmates voted me happiest in the class! Though I hope to never test the limits of their vote in a life raft survival situation.

[Scottuk]

Honestly, I think keeping spirits up was critical both for us and for the rescue men. I was running on an hour or two of sleep per night for several days at that point and kept it up for days further. The rescue guys were all away from their families on a leaky boat in **** weather.

I think it is quite audacious that you felt you needed to lead professionals in their chosen field.

[weavis]

Originally Posted by cwyckham

I'm not ready to jump to any conclusions about the nature of people I've never met based on what information they've been willing to put out there. It is possible that people are right and they think that they are god's gift to sailing and don't think that they made any mistakes during their first long passage as a family. Given the number of mistakes I make (and will admit to readily) in a weekend dawdle in my home waters, that seems a bit unlikely to me.

I also find it striking that the same people who criticize RH for putting too much information on the internet before they were crucified publicly for living a life many of us live or aspire to live, now don't think that maybe they have learned something and are filtering a bit.

Remember that many people called for their children to be taken away because they supposedly recklessly endangered their lives. This type of thing actually happens.

Here are some thoughts that may or may not be relevant, but would certainly cross my mind:

The abandonment was because the baby was sick. The mistakes that were made would mostly be about boat set-up, maintenance, navigational decisions, or any number of things that had nothing at all to do with the abandonment.

Any admission about the prep of the boat or decisions made at sea may be seen as strengthening the reckless endangerment argument, even though it isn't directly relevant to the sickness of the child or the necessity of the rescue.

Regardless of what he actually thinks, it is far better for him to portray things in a certain way, or at least be silent on certain things for a while to allow things to blow over in the press. He can then choose his own way to talk about things if he so chooses.

He owes us nothing. His concern should be with his family.

Off topic~ I think you miss the point.

People can only be evaluated over time on "what they put out there". When you work with someone, or read their comments, an impression is made of their thinking patterns and attitudes.

If the impression of humility and kindness is displayed and events that happen confirm it, then that is what is.

Conversely, if an attitude of condescending arogance and an "I know best" attitude is behind everything.... and events show this.. then that is what it is.

back to topic.~ Regarding the R.H. situation. My interest is solely regarding Catamarans and all matters related to the durability, safety and handling. Why? Because Im going to buy one.

After evaluating all the data, and everything prior to the sailing, and the events published regarding the abandoning of the vessel and reasons thereof,

This whole episode made me enquire of professional colleagues and discuss seamanship, boatbuilding, broaching, knockdowns etc etc.

My faith in the durability and the strength and techniques used for building Catamarans has been restored through professional analysis of the vessel type. I concluded two things based on reasonable doubt and the writings of the diary and the actual damage sustained and recorded as given for the reason

• The quality and viability of the restoration work undertaken.
• The accuracy of events as recalled that happened prior to damage being sustained leaves questions.

On this basis, my interest in the episode is finished. It would be unfair of me to state that the above ARE the reasons. I dont know. I have reasonable doubts. Its not an enquiry, and no one is on trial.

I will pursue buying a catamaran simply because this episode shows a unique set of circumstances that are not typical of the type of vessel.

[DumnMad]

Originally Posted by oldragbaggers

Humble pie can be a hard dish to swallow, harder for some personalities than others. I think some of us would just have so much more respect for both of them in this situation (don't get me wrong, I am not by any means saying I don't respect them) if they would just show a little more humility and even just the slightest allusion to something they could have done better or differently, the fact that maybe they overestimated or underestimated one factor or another, that one decision or another could have been better or more timely, or even just (GASP) wrong. Anything at all that would indicate that there has been some introspection that would say that if they were to get another boat tomorrow they would go about it in a different way that would lead to a higher probability of better results.

You show a remarkable ignorance of how the tabloid media works.
They are primarily looking for a headlining scoop.
Scandals and disaster dominate the headlines.
Any admission of fault will be distorted to make the most scandalous headline possible.
Everyone makes mistakes and could have done things better.
For months busybodies have been creating their own false stories about what happened.
Think of a piece of humble pie that would satisfy you, then think of ways it could be distorted and twisted by taking bits out of context, adding someone else's opinion and devise the most scandalous words for the headline.

As far as I'm concerned Eric and Charlotte have been really smart in not feeding you or the media vultures with humble pie for distortion, twisting and mis-judgement by tabloid media.

[Scottuk]

As far as I'm concerned Eric and Charlotte have been really smart in not feeding you or the media vultures with humble pie for distortion, twisting and mis-judgement by tabloid media.

I think the piecemeal fashion of releasing information is what fosters distortions. Do they owe an explanation of all facets that might of lead to their situation? Damn right, if an estimated $663,000 in public funds was spent on their 'rescue'.