"O'Brian is more realistic and better with language, but Forrestor tells a better story." This is interesting, and though I've never read Forrestor, it does make a bit of sense to me. The way I imagine Forrestor to be is a much more of a canned plot (point a to point b, huzzah huzzah). Why I love O'Brian, is that the characters drive the plot far more than they probably have any right too. I never really know where the story is going to end up. (And most of the time, the story never wraps up at the end of one novel anyway.) I think this reminds me of some other author... I wish I could remember who... "what idiot in the Admiralty would ever think that you could get much use out of a spy in such a position" This is interesting too, because although there are large periods where Maturin is 'at-sea', he also finds himself in enough places/times to 'thwart the enemy' that it is worth gaps. Matt Guil: What a shambles! We're just not getting anywhere. Ros: Not even England. I don't believe in it anyway. Guil: What? Ros: England. Guil: Just a conspiracy of cartographers, you mean? ~~~Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead, Tom Stoppard