Monthly Archives: March 2024

What happened to Nina, Dervla McTiernan

Dervla McTiernan, What Happened to Nina? (Harper Collins 2024; audiobook by Audible, performed by Kristen Sieh, Stacy Glemboski, Lisa Flanagan, Robert Petkoff, George Newbern, Jenna Lamia and Preston Butler III)

I used to read to the Emerging Artist on long car journeys. Then my voice started failing, and for a couple of years we’ve been trying podcasts and audiobooks, with mixed results.

What Happened to Nina worked like a charm. For a start, each of seven characters narrates at least one chapter, and each character has their own reader, so there is plenty of vocal variation. More significantly, the book reads like a television show: locations are established efficiently, introspection is minimal, dialogue and action are pacy, motivations straightforward. Perfect for listening to when part of your mind is on the passing scene. (I know there are people who do their serious reading this way. I’m not disciplined enough for that.)

I’ve read and enjoyed two of Dervla McTiernan’s previous books, The Rúin (link is to my blog post) and The Good Turn. They’re both police procedurals set in Ireland, and apart from the mystery to be solved in each of them, what I enjoyed was the sense of place, and the Irish ness.

In What Happened to Nina? there is no mystery. Twenty-year-old Nina narrates the first section, and then goes missing. The reader can guess the what, who, why, where, and pretty much how right from the start, and becomes quite sure within a couple of chapters. The novel is interested in how the disappearance is dealt with by the other characters, especially her parents and the parents of her boyfriend, who is also the chief suspect. As they gradually discover the truth, there are two harsh surprises, but no real twists. And though the logistics are carefully plotted, the Vermont environment doesn’t come alive, and the dialogue, while recognisably American, has a generic feel to it. (That’s no criticism of the readers/performers, who are universally excellent.)

So yeah, this is OK. It feels to me that it’s written with a possible US TV adaptation in mind. If that happens, it could be a successful series. I might watch it.

Journal Catch-up 22

Two more journals in my endless attempt to keep up to date!


Evelyn Araluen and Jonathan Dunk (editors), Overland 251 (Winter 2023)
(Some of the content is online at the Overland website, and I’ve included links)

As always, this issue of Overland is full of good things. In particular, there’s ‘Close to the subject‘ by Bundjalung and Kullilli journalist Daniel Browning, whose mellifluous voice is familiar to me from his stint as presenter of ABC’s Awaye. The book Close to the Subject was published by Magabala Books in 2023. On the strength of this essay, it’s worth reading. Of his time as a journalist for the ABC, Browning writes:

My stories are always collaborative, and I try to produce content that represents not simply the who, what and why — but the cultural context in which these dialogues take place. I no longer excise myself from my stories, as I used to do (although I always insist that my team practise a simple rule: you are always the least important person in the room). … [The kind of journalism I practise] is one which embeds my blackfella subjectivity. It centres my own story, but only to make clear that I am in relationship with the person I am conversing with. By establishing my own credentials, I am drawing a reflexive enclosing circle around the conversation – its cultural context.

(page 51)

There are a other excellent articles on First Nations Issues from Barry Corr and Hana Pera Aoke, essays on literary matters, and a heart-wrenching episode of World War Two history from Bill Gammage.

The poetry section is wonderfully rich. I’ll just mention ‘Nothing out of the ordinary‘ by Heather Taylor-Johnson. The speaker of the poem lists any number of extraordinary adventures – mainly involving skydiving – that, she says, never happened. The negative is clearly ironic in some way, and you live with the tension of that until the very last line. It wasn’t until I heard Heather Taylor-Johnson read the poem at an Avant-Gaga evening at Sappho’s cafe that I realised with full force that (excuse the spoiler) the poem is an elegy.

Of the stories, ‘The expectations of sparrows’ by Jane Downing (which the website has tagged ‘online soon’) stands out. Its opening sentence, ‘Mavis was contemplating death,’ led me to expect one more story about a young woman suffering from depression as a result of chaotic sexual experiences or worse. But no! Mavis is in a cemetery when a pimply young man approaches her with a proposition involving his desecrating some graves and the two of them sharing the reward when she dobs him in. It’s a tale centred on a solid ethical dilemma, with some finely judged twists.


Alexandra Christie (editor), Heat Series 3 Nº 11 (Giramondo 2023)

I’m not getting on well with Heat. According to its website, it has always aimed to ‘publish innovative Australian and international writers of the highest standard’. The current issue accordingly includes work by two Australian writers and two international writers. So far so good. But look a bit closer and see that of the Australian writers one is listed as a publisher of Heat, and the other is on the editorial advisory board, while one of the ‘international’ writers and both translators live in the USA. Is all excellence, one wonders, to be found within the Heat family or imported from the USA? Must all translations into English include words like ‘faucet’ and ‘gotten’?

Evelyn Juers’ ‘Totality in Wallal. Woolf in Yorkshire. Einstein in Scharbeutz.’ is the high point of the issue, an essay on biography as a form, full of fascinating details from the lives and influence of its subjects. I enjoyed the three prose poems (flash fictions?) from Suneeta Peres da Costa, and the excerpt from Sara Mesa’s novel Un Amor, translated by Katie Whittemore, delivers a terrific final twist that made me almost forgive its leaking faucet. (The excerpt is on the Heat website.)


I hope to be less grumpy in my next journal catch-up.

Steve Armstrong, What’s Left

Steve Armstrong, What’s Left (Flying Island Poets 2021)

The Flying Islands Pocket Poets Series books are close to irresistible. They’re beautifully designed and small enough to fit in a shirt pocket, but much more substantial in their content than their size might suggest. The RRP has been kept at $10 since the series began in 2010, and it’s possible to become a Friend for an annual fee of $100 to receive roughly 12 books each year.

I recently became a Friend, and received What’s Left, published in 2021, along with the swag of 2024 titles.

Steve Armstrong is a Newcastle poet. I like Mark Tredinnick’s description of him as a poet of ‘landscape, desire, memory, love, lust and loss’. Mark Tredinnick may be the Mark to whom the poem ‘This Morning’ (page 58) is dedicated – a poem that has the brilliant opening lines:

_____________ my sorrows pause
for a pair of black cockatoos in flight.

It’s probably pushing it to take those lines as encapsulating the book’s themes: but there are plenty of sorrows, and plenty of attentiveness to the natural world. The sorrows include regret, or at least ambivalence at having wielded axes and chain-saws. I enjoyed a lot in these poems, but probably most of all the way they communicate complexity. Sometimes they do this with a comic edge, as in ‘A Visit ot the Turkey Farm’ (page 33), in which the poem’s speaker buys two boxes of frozen turkey necks, takes them home and chops them up, in his kitchen, with an axe. If there’s a perfectly rational explanation for all this, the poem doesn’t bother with it. I don’t usually quote the final lines of poems, but this is irresistible:

To swing an axe in the kitchen feels

a little like reaching back for my hunter-
gatherer roots, and it's undeniable, there's

something of a serial killer about me too.

The book’s title is rich with possibility. I happened to visit the Melbourne Triennial when I had read to page 50 or so, and can’t resist including here a snap of the life-sized figure hanging from the ceiling of the National Gallery of Victoria entitled What’s Left.

Elmgreen & Dragset,
What’s left, fig. 2
at the Melbourne Triennial

Judging by the couple of poems about children and grandchildren, Steve Armstrong isn’t as young and buff as this figure, and though the climate crisis looms in these pages, the the tone is perhaps more elegiac than panicky. The title poem, ‘What’s Left’ (page 10) offers the image of light falling on what’s left of red in a rusted iron roof: ‘light / falls for the broken’ in that poem and perhaps in the collection as a whole.

If you get a chance to read ‘Thirteen Ways to Know my Grandfather’, grab it. It won the 2019 local prize in the prestigiousNewcastle Poetry Prize and was included in NPP’s 2019 anthology Soft Serve. This is no cuddly grandpa, but a man who tyrannised his children (‘my mother learned to redact’) and grandchildren, including possibly some sexual abuse. The poem doesn’t rest in victimhood or resentment, but embraces complexity, not only in the grandfather’s wartime experience as explanation of his ‘thousand yard stare’, but also in an understanding of what he needed from his grandchildren:

he relied on us to be swift of mind.
_____________________________ We were the morning sun
glancing off the many faces of a still, dark mountain;
our percipience bound by what we could bear.

Since 2021, Steve Armstrong has had another book of poetry published: One River (Puncher & Wattmann 2023) is a series of haibun written in response to walking the Hunter River and its tributaries.

Hisham Matar, My Friends, the book club, page 77

Hisham Matar, My Friends (Viking 2024)

Before the meeting: Hisham Matar was a guest at the 2017 Sydney Writers’ Festival. On a panel titled ‘Resist!’ which was mainly concerned with the recent election of Donald Trump as President of the USA, he enriched the conversation by referring back to his own childhood in Qaddafi’s Libya, where he wondered who was more sculpted by the regime, those who actively served its interests or those who dedicated themselves to resisting it. He argued powerfully for the importance of complexity, of remaining true to one’s own authentic self. (My blog post here.)

In My Friends, when the narrator, Khaled, is a teenager in Benghazi, he and his family hear a short story read over the BBC. It’s a kind Kafkaesque version of Melville’s ‘Bartleby the Scrivener’, in which the word ‘no’ has tremendous power. Nobody spells it out, but we understand that it’s a heavily coded advocacy for non-compliance with the Qaddafi regime. (By the end of the book, we understand it could equally refer to refusal to take up arms.) The young narrator, partly inspired by the story, leaves Libya to study at Edinburgh University.

In 1984, he and his friend Mustafa evade the surveillance of their fellow Libyan students and travel to London to join a demonstration outside the Libyan embassy. When the crowd is fired on from inside the embassy (this really happened), they are seriously injured. Unknown to them, the writer of the short story – Hosam – is also at the demonstration, but walks away uninjured. All three of them are now exiles.

The novel traces the way the lives of these three men intertwine, how their friendships grow, how each of them deals with the pain of separation from family and country, and how each responds to the changing political news from home. The Arab Spring of 2010 brings things to a head: the question is now whether to return to join the revolt against Qaddafi, or to continue with the lives they have built away from home, however insubstantial.

On page 77, Khaled is walking the streets of London, remembering when he and Mustafa first came there for the demonstration which would radically alter the course of their lives. His memories leap forward to the period years later when he and Hosam were walking those same streets, with Hosam enthusing about literary history attached to those places. Both the anecdotes on this page touch on major themes of the book.

At the start of the page Hosam has just relayed gossip that when Karl Marx is said to have been ‘sweating it out’ in the British Library, he was actually visiting his mistress in Soho:

‘I like imagining him shuttling back and forth between the two lives. And, anyway, doesn’t his prose hint at this? I don’t mean that it’s duplicitous necessarily, but that it endlessly sidesteps one thing so as to reach for another … ?’

Regarding characters, this is Hosam, six years older than Khaled, showing off his sophistication. Thematically, his description of Marx’s prose could equally be describing Khaled’s approach to life: it never quite commits himself to a clear position. Even in these early pages when he describes his participation in the demonstration, he oscillates between saying he waas led there by Mustafa and taking responsibility for his own decision.

It strikes me that I could draw up a list of all the writers and works mentioned in the early pages of this book and have a reading schedule for a year. There’s not just Marx, and further on this page Conrad, and much of the western canon (including Montaigne, my current early-morning read), but a whole world of Arabic writing including, for example, the Sudanese poet Nizar Qabbani, the Lebanese novelist Salim el Lozi, and Khaled’s father’s favourite poet Abu al-Ala al-Ma’arri. Conrad, who wrote in English away from his native Poland, crops up a lot.

As we were walking down Beak Street, he said, ‘Have I shown you this yet?’ and shot down a narrow alleyway barely wide enough for a man to lie down. It had the unsuitable name of Kingly Street.
‘It’s here,’ he said and crossed to the other side. ‘No, here, yes, this is it, where one night, very late in the hour, Joseph Conrad, believing himself to be pursued by a Russian spy, took out his pocketknife and hid, waiting. As soon as his pursuer appeared, Conrad sneaked up behind him and slit his throat.’
The story was so farfetched that it did not deserve any attention, but what I remember most was the strange excitement that came over Hosam then.
‘It was probably why,’ he went on to say, ‘soon after this, Conrad, despite all the friends he had in London and his burning literary ambition, moved to the country, where he could look out of his window and be able to see from afar if an enemy were approaching.’

I’ve got no idea if this anecdote is Hisham Matar’s invention – a web search found nothing – but Hosam’s excitement in telling it signals a parallel with his own trajectory. By the time he tells it, he has abandoned his writing career, and like all three of the friends, he is intensely aware that he has enemies in Qaddafi’s regime.

Hosam never explains in so many words why he no longer writes, and is unmoved by his friends’ urgings. It’s through moments like this remembered anecdote that we are able to glean what is going on: Conrad’s withdrawal after killing the suspected agent is parallel to Hosam’s fear of detection and shame at his own silence after the 1984 demo.

The book’s opening words point to a feature of the narrative that this passage exemplifies:

It is, of course, impossible to be certain of what is contained in anyone’s chest, least of all one’s own or those we know well, perhaps especially those we know best

I don’t think we ever know what is going on in Khaled’s heart. For instance, when Qaddafi is being overthrown, he sits up all night listening to news and reading text messages from back home, but at work the next day he mumbles that he doesn’t pay much attention to the news. He is more forthcoming with the reader, but a stubborn silence remains.

There’s a lot more to say, but I’m out of time. There’s one wonderful scene I must mention. When after many years his family come to London to visit him, Khaled finally tells his father the real reason that he hasn’t come home, his participation in the 1984 demonstration and the wound he sustained. What happens next between father and son is profound. Here’s how it starts, as Khaled indicates the location of the scar:

‘Here,’ I said and pointed to my chest.
His manic fingers were all over me, trying to unbutton my shirt and pull it off at the same time. I gave him my back and did it myself. He took hold of my vest, and the child I once had been surrendered his arms. What happened next broke a crack through me.
My father, the tallest man I know, bowed and began to trace his fingers along my scar, reading it, turning around me as he followed its line, tears streaming down his face.
‘My boy, my boy,’ he whispered to himself.

(page 242)

Now I really am out of time.

After the meeting: The five of us discussed this book along with Anne Enright’s The Wren, The Wren (blog post here). This one generated much more interesting conversation. Among other things, two of us had been to Libya when Qaddafi was still in power – for them, the descriptions of life in Benghazi stirred rich memories.

Most if not all of us had read at least one other book by Hisham Matar, The Return (my blog post here), Others had read either In the Country of Men (which I read with my other Book Group, blog post here) or A Month in Siena.

The one who had read A Month in Siena had been irritated by it because ‘nothing happened’. She had a similar complaint abut My Friends. Having enjoyed it up to the point of the demonstration, she was frustrated that instead of telling a story about Libyan politics, the narrative stalled and Khaled in particular settled for a boring uneventful life for most of the book. For others of us, that was the point – it’s a story of exile, and Khaled is stuck, caught between the yearning for home and the impossibility of going there. Yet another challenged the assertion that Khaled was stuck: he had a job teaching English literature, which was the great love of his life – what’s wrong with that? And as the narrator of this book, he is the one who gets to see the whole picture.

Speaking vaguely so as to avoid spoilers, there was some disagreement on how successfully the narrative placed its characters at key events in Libyan history. I thought it was audacious; others thought it was a weakness, a clumsy welding act.

We didn’t come to blows. Even the least enthusiastic among us enjoyed the book, and I think it’s true to say that we all learned a lot about, or were at least reminded of, recent Libyan history.

Also, we had a pleasant meal and heard epic tales of bathroom renovation.

Anne Enright, The Wren, the Wren, the book club, page 77

Anne Enright, The Wren, the Wren (Jonathan Cape 2023)

Before the meeting: Carmel and Nell are mother and daughter. They have a complex relationship with each other, and terrible relationships with men: Carmel’s father Phil, a middlingly successful, womanising poet; Nell’s coercive, rapey on-and-off boyfriend Felim; an endlessly boring man who comes into Carmel’s life for a time; and so on. It seems that Phil’s long shadow is responsible for their misery. Tess writes online copy for an influencer.

The first couple of pages of The Wren, the Wren had me enthralled as the narrator describes a psychological experiment conducted by Russell T Hurlburt, a real person (here’s a link). The experiment deals with the fact that we can never know what is happening in another person’s mind. Sadly, I hadn’t read much further when I realised I had no idea what was in Anne Enright’s mind when she wrote the book. I couldn’t tell what mattered to her about the story, and it gave me no reason to keep reading.

I did read on, motivated pretty much entirely by the need to avoid being scolded at Book Club like the people who hadn’t read Killing for Country at our last meeting.

Nell and Carmel have alternating chapters, except for one chapter narrated by Phil. As far as I could tell, Phil’s chapter is there for the purpose of including some hideous animal cruelty that neither of the women could have witnessed. The book is punctuated by his (in my opinion) tedious poems.

Anne Enright’s style is smooth and there are moments that give joy: Nell’s state of mind after the first time she has sex with Felim (the only time she enjoys it); some nice reflections on the naming of birds in Australia; conversations between Nell and Carmel that capture a fine balance between love and irritated mutual incomprehension. But as a whole, this is one of the least engaging books I’ve read. It may be that this is my internalised patriarchal attitudes taking over my reading mind. If so, please put me right in the comments.

Meanwhile:

Page 77 is part of the description of Phil’s funeral. Though he was accustomed to slagging off his native town in USA talk shows, he had expressed a sentimental desire to be buried there. I suppose this page is darkly funny if you’re not as jaded with the book as I was. To me it just reads as cliché.

First there’s a bit of gratuitous dangerous-driving humour as Carmel is in a car following the hearse from Dublin airport where the body has been received:

The hearse went slowly for a while and then, at some secret moment, started belting along the road. It took the bends so fast, Carmel became a little fixated on the square end of the box disappearing up ahead. This chase went on for three hours, then the hearse slammed on the brakes and they were right on top of it again.

Then a bit of yokel humour. Or it may be a moment of pathos that segues into yokel humour. It’s a choose-your-own-tone paragraph:

People turned to stare. A man took off his hat and nodded right at her, through the glass. A woman stood at a garden wall with her children lined up in a row, and they each made the sign of the cross as the cars crawled past. In the centre of Tullamore, shopkeepers stood in front of half-shuttered windows, pedestrians blessed themselves and, when she looked behind, Carmel saw these people step down off the kerb to follow the cortège, like zombies.
That is what she said later to Aedemar Grant, it was Night of the Living Dead Culchie.

Then some joyless satire about the hypocrisy of public mourning ceremonies:

When they took their place at the top of the church, there was a man in military uniform in the other front pew; absurdly handsome and looped at the shoulder with fancy braid. The president of Ireland had sent him, apparently.
He came over to shake their hands and to give a smart, heart-turning salute, and Carmel wanted to ask him if he thought Phil was any good, as a poet. Because no one her age thought he was any good, he was just an example of something. Also, this whole scene was an example of something. There were a few women in headscarves and about 400 middle-aged men, many of whom had started enjoying themselves right there in the church.

That final sentence is probably a ‘comic’ invocation of the idea that the rural Irish are a mob of drunks.

I haven’t read anything else by Anne Enright*. On the strength of this book I’m unlikely to.

The meeting: In this Book Club, we discuss two books, possibly because if we just choose one it could turn out to be a dud. The Wren, the Wren was paired with My Friends by Hisham Matar. Both books start out with the notion that it’s impossible to know what’s going on in another person’s head. Both have a lot to do with fathers, and – as someone pointed out at the club meeting – both have protagonists who are lost.

No one told me I was completely wrong about The Wren, The Wren. There was general agreement that Carmel was more interesting than Nell, and no one cared for the book as a whole. We were all bemused by the praise heap[ed on it elsewhere, including its being included on the long list for the Booker. Two people had heard Anne Enright talk at the Adelaide Festival Writers’ Week. Evidently she was delightful, speaking a lot about the importance of poets and family in Irish society and not that much about the book. A friend of one of us had said it was a wonderful book: we surmised that this was because of its portrayal of coercive control – which I at least thought was as ordinary as Phil’s poetry.

My Friends is a much more interesting book and generated much more interesting conversation. I’ll write about it separately.


* Or so I thought. A couple of hours after pressing ‘Publish’, I discovered that I read The Green Road only a year ago, and to judge by my blog post (here) I loved it.

Sebastian Barrry’s Old God’s Time at the book group, page 77

Sebastian Barry, Old God’s Time (Faber and Faber 2023)

Before the meeting: Tom Kettle is a nine-months retired Irish policeman, living quietly suicidal in an annexe of a castle in Dalkey, on the coast outside Dublin. Two young coppers from his old unit come knocking on his door with a request that he read the file of an old case he is particularly suited to help with. The conversation is oblique, but we understand that the case has to do with child sexual abuse by Catholic priests.

It’s the set-up for a Cincinnatus story: the hero is summoned out of retirement to do battle with the forces of evil. The reader settles down for a yarn whose shape is familiar, and whose subject is also, horribly, familiar: the terrible history of sexual abuse of children by Irish clergy.

From the beginning, however, Sebastian Barry is in no great hurry to get that story under way. Tom gives the young coppers shelter from a storm overnight, but barely looks at their file. He is still grieving the death of his wife some years earlier, and is missing his two adult children. The visit from the young men and then a couple of days later from their boss, his own former boss, stirs up memories of his terrible childhood in an institution, and the sexual abuse inflicted on his wife by a priest when she was a child in another institution. This is no longer a straightforward police procedural featuring a heroic retired copper. It becomes something much more elusive than that: part ghost story, part psychological thriller, part fictional misery memoir, part dramatisation of the long tail of child abuse, part revenge tragedy. And part, perhaps, a portrait of a mind in the early stages of dementia.

Bit by bit a tale of horror emerges. At times it seems that only Sebastian Barry’s brilliantly musical prose and the presence of the land, sea and town are all that stand between us and the abyss. At the same time, it is a deeply humane book that features a gallery of odd characters (odd in the sense of interesting and surprising), and wonderfully memorable dialogue.

There are so many twists that I’m reluctant to say more about the plot. I was gripped, and I trusted the truthfulness of the story, though (no spoilers) I was not completely convinced by the main event of the final act: too much hinges on ‘an expression of pure depravity‘, italics in the original.

The emotional spine of the novel is Tom’s love for his wife, June. They gave each other the possibility of decent lives after the desolation of their childhoods. On page 77, he is remembering their early days together.

Here’s the paragraph that fills the page –’those things’ in the first sentence is the June’s childhood spent in an orphanage (no details), and the only other things that may need explaining are that June is working as a waitress in a Wimpy bar, and that she has been fostered by a prim and moralistic woman, Mrs Carr:

For so long she was quiet and never spoke about those things. They’d been going out for a whole month, him fairly killing himself to get out on the bus or the train to her, from his lousy digs in Glasnevin, or his work in Harcourt Street. He tried to see her every day. If only the old train station there had still been open, oh bejesus, but he had to gallop all the way across Dublin, through the Green, down Grafton Street, skirt the college, stampede up Abbey Street and onto Talbot, and go like the clappers to Connolly station for the 5.30 to Bray. He was younger then and fit but it was summer all the same and he was obliged to change into a spare shirt in the tiny jacks as noisy as a drumkit, and wash the sweat off his chest and arms into the bargain. After a month of this he might have qualified for the Irish team at the Olympics. A whole month, a fortune in train fares. Couples might be expected to talk through their life stories the first night – not June. She liked to tell him all that had happened that day at the café, maybe in just a little too much detail, but he could bear it. He liked her in the aftermath of her work, weary but not bone-weary, her feet aching. She’d have thrown on her jeans and grabbed a jacket. Her lovely denim jacket, the very height of hippy fashion. The jeans she had worn into the bath as instructed by the label, and let shrink on her legs, skin-tight. She would never meet him in her digs, of course, because it was some kind of religious gaff for the protection of Catholic girls – Mrs goddamn Carr lived in Stillorgan, far away from the Wimpy. Not that he even knew about Mrs Carr then. He knew nothing. She loved to natter on but she never talked. He supposed that was it, that was how she was. In a way he was relieved she didn’t go serious on him, because he was the guardian of his own silences, had been all his life.

It’s so alive, carrying the reader along with sheer vitality – the vivid evocation of first love remembered in old age, and details like the tiny jacks (that’s a toilet to non-Irish speakers, not the only one in the book), the word-map of Dublin. Then, after a little joke about the Olympics and a wry complaint about the expense, the paragraph turns to June: her work, her fashionable clothes, her chattiness, her home, and, crucially, her silence about her past. Then the key sentence, so deftly placed that you might almost miss it, ‘She loved to natter on but she never talked,’ and his version of himself as ‘the guardian of his own silences.’

Is it a particularly Irish thing, this ability to ‘natter on’ without talking? It certainly feels familiar to me from my own Irish-heritage background. Almost all the conversations in this novel are elliptical, from the first visit of the young gardaí to the climactic revelations about June’s death – we can mostly guess at what isn’t being said, but we have to work at it.

After the meeting:
There were seven of us, excellent food, a friendly dog under the table who one suspected was more interested in the food than in us, glass walls open to a garden on a gorgeous early-autumn Sydney night. Once we had sat down to eat, and a number of book-group-relevant announcements had been made – the long aftermath of an injury sustained at a much earlier meeting, the imminent sale of the ouse where we were meeting, my own modest act of self-publication – the evening took an unaccustomed turn. One man decided to take on a smilingly stern facilitator role and proposed that we each take an initial turn of two minutes to give a quick first response to the book, and then stomped cheerfully on anyone who attempted to speak out of turn. This is probably standard practice in other book groups, and if so I can see why. That first round was rich. Here are some highlights (as they survive in my poor memory):

  • L– loved the Irishness of it: the way the dead were still present, the oddities of the community, the evocation of the country
  • G– was keen on the book but felt that the final movement piled things on too much
  • I– said it was a beautifully written Irish novel, but he wasn’t sure the world needed any more beautifully written irish novels. He thought it wasn’t as good as the other Sebastian Barry book we’ve read, A Long Long Way (link to my blog post)
  • D– found the prose irritating, and didn’t enjoy the experience of being inside the meandering mind of an old man – he got quite enough of that already, thanks very much (someone pointed out, later when allowed by the facilitator, that Tom is 66, a good bit younger than D– and most of the rest of us)
  • J– (that is, me) said something passable, and mentioned the, um, glibness of that ‘expression of depravity
  • S– said he loved and hated the book. When he started he thought, ‘Not another novel abut child sex abuse, and not another novel about the Catholic Church,’ but he read on and was often delighted and moved. He understood something very early that others of us took half the book to realise (I’m carefully avoiding spoilers).
  • N– thought that the oddities of Tom’s memory weren’t so much about cognitive decline as the way traumatic experiences can be remembered as if they happened to someone else. He reminded us of the pivotal moment when Tom, having been unsure whether some of the stories in his head were June’s experiences or his own, realises with a shock that something he had remembered as something he witnessed had actually happened to him.

Others shared my reaction to the word ‘depravity’ and the way it suggests a lack of imaginative commitment to the big events near the end. But, as often happens, we disagreed about the very ending, which I don’t think is ambiguous at all. What I hadn’t realised until the meeting is how that ending – however you interpret it – echoes key elements of the opening pages. It would be far too spoilerish to say more.

The consensus was that this was an excellent book, but something a little more cheerful might be called for next time.

Ellen van Neerven’s Heat and Light, page 76

Ellen van Neerven, Heat and Light (UQP 2015)

This book of short stories gives no external indication that it’s a work of Blak queer fiction. The back cover and introductory pages describe the contents accurately enough – traditional story telling with ‘a unique contemporary twist’, characters ‘caught between a desire for freedom and a sense of belonging’ – but make no reference to First Nations, unless you count mention of the NSW Premier’s Literary Awards – Indigenous Writing, and the David Unaipon Award, and a discreet badge that reads ‘Black Australian Writing’. Queerness gets even less acknowledgement: apart from a quote from the ABR that the stories ‘evoke mystery and sensuality in equal measure’, there’s no mention of sexuality at all.

So let me tell you: this is a book in which there’s a lot of sex. In most of the stories, queerness and Blakness are taken for granted.

Having got that off my chest, I can tell you that this collection of stories by Mununjali Yugambeh writer Ellen van Neerven is terrific. It’s in three parts: ‘Heat’, five stories that amount to a compellingly compressed family saga; ‘Water’, a single longer story that is the big surprise of the collection; and ‘Light’, ten tales of complex intimate relationships. Most, perhaps all, the main characters are First Nations and most of the action takes place in either Queensland or Western Australia. (One character refers to my home as ‘slimehole Sydney’.)

Page 76 (still my age) comes part way through ‘Water’. The story is set in a future Australia, where ‘Aboriginal spirituality’ is a dominant religion, and President Tanya Sparkle is implementing some dire policies regarding First Nations people while presenting a veneer of respect – creating chaos in the public transport system by changing all route destinations to not-always-accurate Indigenous names and, at the heart of this story, re-forming offshore islands to create a ‘super island’ where Aboriginal people can apply to live, a kind of apartheid dressed up as innovative native title.

The reader has barely settled in to this brave new Australia, when further weirdness is revealed. The narrator has been employed as ‘Cultural Liaison Officer’ for the first re-formation project, in the islands of Moreton Bay. Her job places the story well into the realm of the fantastic: she is to liaise with non-human beings who have recently appeared on the islands, the ‘plantpeople’. Page 76 introduces them:

These creatures, beings, I’m not yet comfortable on how to place them, were formed when they started experimenting here, mining the sea in preparation for the islandising. It was a young botanist … who first discovered them: he distinguished their green human-like heads lined up on the banks of Russell Island …

Right from the start, the government has been very protective of them, so they don’t become a public spectacle. You need permission from a government official to go near the population.

Basically, they present a problem for the Project at this stage, as all the southern Moreton Bay islands are being evacuated. This means everyone has to leave their homes and businesses for an indeterminate amount of time while the engineers work on the re-forming. These plantpeople, who divide their time between the water, Russell Island and the edges of some of the smaller unoccupied islands, must cooperate during the process, for the safety of all.

Some of them ‘root’ – that is, they firm their roots to an area, into the ground, and are hard to persuade to move; you can’t get them away. Milligan tells me there are a few that actively voice their opinions within the community, speaking out against the government and their plans.

They are a very intelligent species. I read a transcript of an interview with one of them. She spoke well, from the notes, a steady, formalistic English. Hers was the only first-person account and insight I have into what these people are about. A plant’s mind.

So in the middle of a collection of more or less social-realist stories about queer Blak life in Australia, there’s a weird – and very funny – piece of fantasy science fiction.

It’s a complex set-up. The Cultural Liaison Officer’s job is to persuade the plantpeople to cooperate, to allow themselves to be displaced. At first she is successful – she gets on well with these non-human creatures and comes to believe, as her white employers don’t, that they are fully sentient. As her sympathy for their plight deepens, she comes to suspect a darker purpose behind her ‘liaison’ work. She forms a forbidden bond with Larapinta, a female of the species, and that bond … well, I already said there’s a lot of sex in this book. But then there are further twists as the origins of the plantpeople are revealed and the parallels with the original dispossession of First Nations peoples on this continent come into sharp focus.

Ellen van Neerven is better known as a poet than as a fiction-writer. Their two books Comfort Food and Throat (links are to my blog posts) are wonderful. I found Heat and Light in a street library. I’m not parting with it.

*** New Book: Pick Up Six***

I’ve just published my sixth collection of verses from this blog: Pick Up Six.

In the past I’ve given these books as Christmas or New Year presents, but I’ve missed those dates this year. I’ve given some copies away, including one to Maritza, whose brilliant leadership of the Strong Seniors class at our local pool gym is the subject of one verse. And I’m carrying copies in my backpack to give to friends as I see you.

Of course, you can buy a copy from lulu.com. Or direct from me by ckicking on this button:

Buy Now button

There’s information about all six books, plus my chapbook published by Gininderra Press, None of us Alone, on my Publications page.

Reading the Essays of Montaigne, post 1

It’s time I started another slow read, a couple of pages a day of a work that floats around in the culture but that I haven’t read, or want to reread. It’s been deeply rewarding so far to have read Proust’s À la recherche du temps perdu, George Eliot’s Middlemarch, St Augustine’s Confessions and The Iliad. There are many books that could fill this early morning slot. The one that has successfully nudged for my attention an has been available, is the essays of Michel de Montaigne.

My only direct encounter with Montaigne was 50 years ago when I embarked on a French Honours course at university, but after a couple of weeks wrestling with Middle French, I gave up the struggle. I remember absolutely nothing of Montaigne from those weeks.

David Malouf may have sowed the seed of my desire to revisit him by quoting him at the beginning of his 2011 Quartlerly Essay, The Happy Life (my blog post). Then, most recently, David Runciman devoted an episode of his History of Ideas: Past, Present, Future podcast to Montaigne’s booklength essay, Apology for Raimond Sebon. I borrowed a copy from my local library and began reading yesterday, the 1st of March, 444 years to the day from when Montaigne signed his note ‘To the Reader’, which tries to discourage me from reading any further:

So, reader, I am myself the substance of my book, and there is no reason why you should waste yourleisure on so friviolous and unrewarding a subject

We’ll see.

I’m starting out with the Penguin Classic edition of essays selected, translated and introduced by J. M. Cohen. This book dates from 1959, and must be returned to the library before I can read it all at my slow pace, so I may switch to another edition somewhere along the line. But here goes!