RawFaith: A Family Saga Documentary

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by Captain Bligh

Thank you for the explanation. The documentary left quite a bit out. I didn't realize that he was towed and rescued so many times- also left out of the documentary. The more I learn about this story, the more I think the documentary is amateurish.

You should watch it again. Just about all of this was IN the doco. And whilst the doco doesn't spell out how many times he was rescued it certaily indicates it was more than twice.

What I like about the doco was that it was non judgemental, but certainly left me with the feeling and the knowledge that the guy had no idea what he was doing, and with no doubt what so ever that the boat was a nightmare.

I really fail to understand how anyone is knocking the documentary maker. To do so I think is just an inate desire to knock.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by tedsherrin

You should watch it again. Just about all of this was IN the doco. And whilst the doco doesn't spell out how many times he was rescued it certaily indicates it was more than twice.

What I like about the doco was that it was non judgemental, but certainly left me with the feeling and the knowledge that the guy had no idea what he was doing, and with no doubt what so ever that the boat was a nightmare.

I really fail to understand how anyone is knocking the documentary maker. To do so I think is just an inate desire to knock.

I haven't seen the documentary so I certainly wouldn't be among those to knock him, but I did read somewhere that in an interview the documentary maker said he still likes to get together with McKay for burgers and a beer, or something to that effect, so some folks may feel that it's pretty tough to be truly objective in a documentary about someone you hang out with socially and maybe that's where the criticism comes from?

I've never met McKay either and probably wouldn't have developed much of an interest in this whole subject if my nephew hadn't got involved so I was afraid for his life if he ever went to sea with McKay aboard Raw Faith. McKay seems to have a victim mentality all throughout this saga and still can't understand why everyone was so critical and didn't like him. What he failed to understand, and I suspect still fails to understand is that most of the early criticism was constructive in nature and people didn't dislike him at all. I still remember when a buddy I was delivering an Able Apogee 50 up from Florida with first told me about the project way back when it was still in Addison and I thought it sounded pretty neat and wanted to see it succeed. But McKay's extreme arrogance and unwillingness to take constructive suggestions from experienced schooner captains is what did him in, at least in the Rockland/Camden area. The boat never was going to be pretty, but if he'd asked for help and was willing to follow the good advice he was given, this story could well have had a different outcome. But he wouldn't take advice from anyone and only became more withdrawn and defensive when he could have been embraced by the schooner community. Virtually every other sailor I know, and especially those who call themselves "Captain," didn't start out as the captain on their very first 88' boat, and they all served as crew and then mate on several other vessels, learning all they could about boats and seamanship along the way. McKay thought he could skip ALL those steps and successfully "captain" this thing he designed and built even though he had absolutely no credentials to design any sort of boat OR build one OR sail one, let alone an 88' one he planned to take to sea. Just incredible hubris and disrespect for the sea while repeatedly putting others lives in danger.

Despite all this, since I don't know McKay personally, I can't fault the documentary maker for his choice of friends, but like I said, there's a perception that it's sort of tough to tell a truly objective story about someone you choose to hang out with socially, so maybe that's at the root of some of the criticism of the documentary maker. I guess we'd need someone who was already very familiar with this story to review the documentary for us and then let us know how objective he found it to be. Based on what you've said about the documentary, it sounds like he did a pretty good job of covering it accurately.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

I haven't seen the documentary so I certainly wouldn't be among those to knock him, but I did read somewhere that in an interview the documentary maker said he still likes to get together with McKay for burgers and a beer, or something to that effect, so some folks may feel that it's pretty tough to be truly objective in a documentary about someone you hang out with socially and maybe that's where the criticism comes from?

I've never met McKay either and probably wouldn't have developed much of an interest in this whole subject if my nephew hadn't got involved so I was afraid for his life if he ever went to sea with McKay aboard Raw Faith. McKay seems to have a victim mentality all throughout this saga and still can't understand why everyone was so critical and didn't like him. What he failed to understand, and I suspect still fails to understand is that most of the early criticism was constructive in nature and people didn't dislike him at all. I still remember when a buddy I was delivering an Able Apogee 50 up from Florida with first told me about the project way back when it was still in Addison and I thought it sounded pretty neat and wanted to see it succeed. But McKay's extreme arrogance and unwillingness to take constructive suggestions from experienced schooner captains is what did him in, at least in the Rockland/Camden area. The boat never was going to be pretty, but if he'd asked for help and was willing to follow the good advice he was given, this story could well have had a different outcome. But he wouldn't take advice from anyone and only became more withdrawn and defensive when he could have been embraced by the schooner community. Virtually every other sailor I know, and especially those who call themselves "Captain," didn't start out as the captain on their very first 88' boat, and they all served as crew and then mate on several other vessels, learning all they could about boats and seamanship along the way. McKay thought he could skip ALL those steps and successfully "captain" this thing he designed and built even though he had absolutely no credentials to design any sort of boat OR build one OR sail one, let alone an 88' one he planned to take to sea. Just incredible hubris and disrespect for the sea while repeatedly putting others lives in danger.

Despite all this, since I don't know McKay personally, I can't fault the documentary maker for his choice of friends, but like I said, there's a perception that it's sort of tough to tell a truly objective story about someone you choose to hang out with socially, so maybe that's at the root of some of the criticism of the documentary maker. I guess we'd need someone who was already very familiar with this story to review the documentary for us and then let us know how objective he found it to be. Based on what you've said about the documentary, it sounds like he did a pretty good job of covering it accurately.

Well, IF people are judging the doco maker because AFTER he made the doco he has become social with the subject, then that's pretty stupid of them. I cannot see any loss of cred or objectivity in doing so. But, despite that, the film doesn't even need to be objective. It tells a story of what happened and the struggles if the family relationships during these years and does so quite successfully.

My main reason to respond was to comment on your comments about who a 'captain' is. Any skipper of a boat is also it's captain in this part of the world. No training experience is necessary. The terminology is irrelevant over here.

[jtsailjt]

Originally Posted by tedsherrin

Well, IF people are judging the doco maker because AFTER he made the doco he has become social with the subject, then that's pretty stupid of them. I cannot see any loss of cred or objectivity in doing so. But, despite that, the film doesn't even need to be objective. It tells a story of what happened and the struggles if the family relationships during these years and does so quite successfully.

My main reason to respond was to comment on your comments about who a 'captain' is. Any skipper of a boat is also it's captain in this part of the world. No training experience is necessary. The terminology is irrelevant over here.

I'm only speculating on the reason for the criticism of the filmmaker, but it's all I could come up with as a reason since by all reports it's an entertaining film to watch. Probably not logical at all, just a "guilt by association" thing.

That may be what a "captain" is in your part of the world, but here, especially when your vessel is 88' long and requires a crew and an actual, qualified captain, calling yourself captain or even allowing others to regularly address you this way when they aren't just joking around, when you have NO sailing experience at all, is considered to be inappropriate and disrespectful to those who have actually gone to the trouble to earn that title.

Of course there are times when the title "Captain" is used loosely to address anyone who happens to be at the helm of any small boat in a harbor, or almost anyone at a yacht club cocktail party, but that's a whole different thing than what McKay did, which is to encourage people to call him "Captain" as he attempted to assume the role of the captain of Raw Faith, when he had NO clue about how to safely sail it or rig it or build it in such a way as to make it seaworthy. While he was calling himself Captain and encouraging people to think of him as captain or Raw Faith, he was felt by the vast majority of actual captains and sailors who knew of him to be about as far from a real, qualified "captain" as anyone could possibly be, and the results of his attempts to go to sea consistently supported that opinion.

[Rustic Charm]

Originally Posted by jtsailjt

I'm only speculating on the reason for the criticism of the filmmaker, but it's all I could come up with as a reason since by all reports it's an entertaining film to watch. Probably not logical at all, just a "guilt by association" thing.

That may be what a "captain" is in your part of the world, but here, especially when your vessel is 88' long and requires a crew and an actual, qualified captain, calling yourself captain or even allowing others to regularly address you this way when they aren't just joking around, when you have NO sailing experience at all, is considered to be inappropriate and disrespectful to those who have actually gone to the trouble to earn that title.

Of course there are times when the title "Captain" is used loosely to address anyone who happens to be at the helm of any small boat in a harbor, or almost anyone at a yacht club cocktail party, but that's a whole different thing than what McKay did, which is to encourage people to call him "Captain" as he attempted to assume the role of the captain of Raw Faith, when he had NO clue about how to safely sail it or rig it or build it in such a way as to make it seaworthy. While he was calling himself Captain and encouraging people to think of him as captain or Raw Faith, he was felt by the vast majority of actual captains and sailors who knew of him to be about as far from a real, qualified "captain" as anyone could possibly be, and the results of his attempts to go to sea consistently supported that opinion.

I agree with you entirely about 'captain McKay'

From what I can pick up on both CH discussions, and others elsewhere using the term 'captain' for the person in charge of a vessel of any size is pretty subjective the world over, not just in 'my part of the world'. The term 'captain' in nautical use for a person in charge of a vessel is older than any educational and even legal institutions. It is NOT confined purely to the commercial maritime world, which is what you are claiming.

In 'my part of the world', as you call it, the terms 'Master' are usually reserved for those with qualifications, but to my knowledge (could be wrong) there is no legal impediment to the term being used by those who are not formally qualified. And ship size has little to do with it, it's more about whether one is commercial or recreational. Keeping in mind that even a recreational 'skipper, captain' can have a formal qualification up to and including that of 'master' class.

My main point, is that whilst you may find it disrespectful, it's only your subjective 'feelings' on the issue and not everyone in this 'world' feel the same, either in 'this part of the world' or 'your part of the world' for that matter. Of course, if there is some legislation 'in your part of the world', or elsewhere that specifically rules out using the term for non formerly qualified operators, then you would have a point.

And stupidity, recklessness, indifference doesn't necessarily rule out someone using the term captain either. The 'captain' of the Concordia is an example. "Captain McKay" in this sense, legal and otherwise has every right to use the term as the person in charge of the non commercial vessel.

[jtsailjt]

I agree entirely with you that there's no law against calling yourself Captain and suggesting to people that you actually ARE all that title entails, but in my subjective viewpoint, it's not appropriate and is part of the reason why McKay became increasingly disrespected in the local sailing community.

Similarly, it's perfectly legal for you to ask people to call you "Astronaut Ted," and while I might think it a bit odd, I wouldn't have any big problem with it, but when you start recruiting crew to actually blast off with you in your homemade rocket ship, THEN I'd say this calling yourself "astronaut" thing has gone just a bit too far......