Would it be true to say that the staterooms on B deck were more commodious and posh than those on C deck? I was curious to know if there were any differences in what a first class passenger would get, comparatively.
If you're referring to recognition, I'd say no. Some of the richest people were on C-Deck. J.J.A. and Madeleine were in C-62-64, and they were the richest onboard. Then there were the Strausses (C-55), the Wideners (C-68-70), the Thayers (C-60?), and Mr. Guggenheim (C-?). I don't think that these people would have come second in attention to, say, Edith Rosenbaum Russell (A-11?). Although the C.of R. was in B-77, and she would have been considered aristocratic and therefore worthy of unconditional accommodation.
This makes sense to me, anyway. However, I expect to get bombarded with long-winded corrections from some others within the next couple of days.
No, I wouldn't think what you had to say should be bombarded; it didn't occur to me that some of the Titanic's richest people were staying in C deck staterooms.
However, I figured since the parlor suites were located on B deck, that somehow B deck had more luxury and spaciousness to it. After all, Charlotte Cardeza was not richer than John Jacob Astor, and yet she occupied the other set of parlor suites with her son.
It may not necessarily have been that the richer folk on the Titanic occupied the better staterooms. Nevertheless, you may be right; perhaps there is no difference between B and C deck staterooms?
The only other one here that was supposedly on B-Deck was Guggenheim, but the conditions are basically the same and therefore the assertion I made still stands.
Although a first-class ticket at the time was sold to anyone with money, the various social, political, and military elites on board were known and highly regarded/respected. It is for this reason that Astor might have been a bit more accommodated, and obviously recognized, than, say, Arthur Gee, and that isn't because Mr. Gee was on E-Deck--it was because of the status that J.J. held. In short: inequality in accommodations and attention between first-class passengers, if it, indeed, existed at all, was determined more by the identity and status of the individual passenger rather than the particular deck on which the passenger's cabin rested.
As for the difference of cabin accommodations between decks, there were differences in sizes. Some, like the parlor suites, had more space and consisted of a larger number of rooms. The parlors had fireplaces and walk-in closets and , for those on B-Deck, also had private promenades. Aside from styles and the above variations, however, all accommodations in the first-class suites would likely have been the same, on an basic level. It is possible that some first-class suites, other than the parlors, had fireplaces. I thought I saw a picture of Peuchen's suite, and, as I remember, it had a fireplace (although I may be mistaken). He was in C-104, right across the hall from the Astors. His was the first inside suite on the port side, just aft of the forward grand staircase on C-Deck.
Furthermore, I doubt the accommodations of the particular suite determined the amount of attention a first-class passenger received; again, it's reasonable to presume that the degree of accommodation was determined by the identity and status of the particular passenger. Social status was regarded as very important at that time.
I often wondered about the windows in the A-Deck and Boat Deck cabins. They didn't look directly to the sea, they had a public promenade before it.
Didn't these passengers in this rooms felt annoyed
by rubbernecks? Or was the glass of the windows a kind of milk glass to avoid nosy views?
I think you'll find that they used draperies to solve that problem. And out in the public promanade, anyone playing the role of Peeping Tom would almost certainly attract a lot of unwelcome official attention. Ain't nothing like public scorn and the prospect of wearing handcuffs to act as a deterrant.