Zed
Author John Keegan gives the impression late in this very good book that he held the Kaiser partially responsible for the Great War as he embarked on a pointless attempt to match Britain's maritime strength that “....in all possibility, might have been the (cause of the) neurotic climate of suspicion and insecurity from which the First World War was born.” Based on this book being very much written from a British point of view it is easy to understand why Keegan is of this opinion. In the end though I have still no idea and will read further into this subject in the coming years.
As to the book it strangely gave depictions of battles in that the author's coverage was written with a sense of tedium. Thousands died in pointless campaigns that all seemed the same from east to west to north to south. Events such as the African theatre and Gallipoli were so rare as to be almost startlingly different. Keegan says as much, one point calling “The chronicles of its battles..” the “... dreariest literature in military history”
If I can think of one thing that this book lacked was coverage of US involvement. Late as it was the fresh troops made a considerable difference to the final outcome I would suggest. But with that there is not much new I can add to an already saturated subject other than say that this is a very good one volume history and is to be recommended to anyone looking for an Anglocentric point of view.
My good friend Gordon Wilson gifted me this very good book. His timing was impeccable as I had an enforced and long flight between Brisbane and the UK and this made the hours fly and the mind wander. My heartfelt thanks to Gordon.
https://www.goodreads.com/series/88275-trilogy
Anyone who has read Patrick Leigh Fermors trilogy, see the link above, should enjoy this book on the condition they do not expect the author Nick Hunt to write as Fermor. Hunt has completed a journey and then written what can be described as a fan friendly homage to Fermors famous walk. I have enjoyed reading Hunts observation of the changed Europe. In one volume he has tried to keep to the original path and with that had to contend with modern obstacles such as motorways being in places they should not have been. The one thing I noticed was that there was still that element of human kindness towards the traveller. No matter where people are interested in people given the correct circumstances. And I wish it had been me that had made this homage. Nick Hunt has achieved what a few of us could only daydream about.
An interesting book without reaching great heights. The title is a little misleading as other than a few instances Blue Poles hardly gets a mention.
Blue Poles by US Abstract Expressionist Jackson Pollack was a huge part of the culture wars during the Whitlam Labor government years of 1972 to 1975. At the time the fledgling National Art Gallery paid the princely sum of 1.3m Australian Dollars. The only way that the NAG could purchase was with prime ministerial approval and Whitlam signed the cheque. The yelling began. Whitlam, always a fairly arrogant type in the face of criticism, basically called the painting a masterpiece, told his opponent's they were lowbrow reactionaries and put Blue Poles on his Prime Minister's Christmas cards the following festive season. All heady stuff in the rather boring crap that was and still is the Australian Culture and History Wars. Wars fought by intellectual bullshit artists on both sides of politics who prove that as a nation The Saints got it right when they sang about their homeland that it had ‘no problems' so ‘you don't need your brain no more' Proof of this was when Sydney Harbour bridge painter and not that funny comedian Paul Hogan got his bit of fame by trashing Blue Poles.
Typical of books such as this one learns something new. William Dobell 1943 win in the Archibald prize was an interesting read. https://www.smh.com.au/lifestyle/the-william-dobell-portrait-that-broke-a-friendship-and-divided-a-nation-20141016-10r84z.html
As to Blue Poles itself, I have only ever seen it once, back in 2000, and it was a look for the sake of looking by me as I was not really as heavily interested in art at the time. But I have become a fair bit more interested in art in all its forms nowadays, so I now need to head back and have a look at this controversial painting. It is now considered a superb investment and could go at auction for as high as $300 million Australian. This item states ‘at least several hundred million dollars'
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-09-21/blue-poles-artwork-seller-discusses-australian-government-deal/7863672
Then there are those that are still unable to let go. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2016-10-07/governments-$350m-painting-should-be-sold-to-reduce-debt/7911882
James Paterson may be on to something here. The cost to the Australian public in terms of hack politician's pensions is enormous, so to sell Blue Poles (and why not all of our cultural heritage for that matter) for the right price can keep James and his fellow politician's snouts in their superannuated troughs for a few more years. As I said previously, all heady stuff in the rather boring crap that was and still is the Australian Culture and History Wars.
The History Wars in Australia have been going on for a fair while now. This title is from 2006 when the wars were at their height. The then Prime Minister John Howard is a noted anglophile. He regaled the so called “black armband view of history” with the support of the Murdoch press. Rupert Murdoch, who has over the years made a concerted effort to make his father a Great War hero has since renounced his Australian citizenship so as to become a US media tycoon. His influence still looms large to this day in his attempt to turn Australian history into something it has never been. http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-06-26/anu-reveals-why-it-walked-away-from-ramsay-centre-agreement/9910668 Though not mentioned in this item his newspapers have been vociferous in their attacks on academia.
Inga Cledinnnenn essay spends far too much time defending the position of professional historians over historical novelists. Is the reading public that removed from historical writing as opposed to novelist telling an either good or bad story of historical interest? I would have thought not but then I hardly care. I would have thought that I read history to be informed about an event, make a value judgement based on my knowledge or lack thereof whereas the historical novel is to enjoy as just a novel. Am I wrong I wonder?
As to the sub title ‘Who owns the past' PM Howard at one point called for historians to publish objective records of achievement. Inga Cledinnnenn discusses that Howard seemed to think that historians were leaving out the ‘good bits' and disagrees in that that it is not the historian's job to pick and choose. I tend to agree with her. When did history writing become slanted towards being a record of achievement? This is not what history should be about for me. Yes achievements are too to be considered but to use a recent book I read, The Van Demonian Wars by Nick Brodie how can anyone water down and be dismissive of this less than savoury event when writing (and teaching) history? This for me is nothing to do with the rights or wrongs of such events. Bad things happen throughout history! Teach about it and learn from it. In fact I find it slightly hypocritical that the same people are angry at the Japanese for not discussing their less than happy history in the 2nd WW.
In the end though this essay rambles and strays from the subject far too often. I mean pages critiquing popular historical novelist Kate Ganville? What a waste.
Easy to read and oddly a bit of a page turner but in the end poor for being on the ‘try hard' side of satire. If a book is going to be, or at least attempt to be, Orwellian in nature it kind of has to be believable. This had its moments, the chapter with the aboriginal dope growers was a highlight, but it all seemed a bit forced and over the top.
I wrote that author Shirley Hazards previous novel, The Transit of Venus, was a book “...about Love but not in the cloying way I should imagine a Mills and Boons Novel being.” This, The Great Fire, is not far removed from that statement. Where the former was for me about the “transient nature and the morality of (Love) as a weapon” this book is about Love as a power to transform after trauma, in this case the events in WW2 and family bereavement. The prose is exceptional and that is the strength of the novel as the plot is fairly thin. That has been what has surprised me in reading both of Hazards 2 novels. Surprise that I can be dragged into them when the subject would hardly be my choice generally. But in the end the skinny plot did not save me from marking down the book in a comparison with The Transit of Venus. That book is to reread to discover the hidden secrets and meanings. This one less so.
Winner of 2004 Miles Franklin Award and probably deservedly. Just not my kind of book.
Very good and recommended to the beginner. Readers be aware though. It is long and can be complex. With that in mind the author is to be congratulated for making the complexity of the subject such an easy read. A book of it times as the comparisons to recent events in history books I tend to judge harshly but they tend to work in this case.
My second Shirley Harzzard novel in a short space of time. The previous, People in Glass Houses, I thoroughly enjoyed so was looking forward to reading The Transit Of Venus. To say I have been surprised by this book would be an understatement. Both books are chalk and cheese in delivery and concept.
Be that as it may The Transit Of Venus is one of the most compelling novels I have read for reasons I am not going to be able to articulate particularly well. The plot itself seems fairly shallow but then the plot may itself not be the point. The title is very good as the book is about Love but not in the cloying way I should imagine a Mills and Boons Novel being. This book is about its transient nature and the morality of it as a weapon. The cast of characters are very middle class and speak to each other in a manner that leaves a lot unsaid and would be very alien to the vast majority of working people.
On reaching the end of the book I realised that I had missed subtleties that the more astute than me would have picked up on the way through. With that I can see me rereading this in the future. It remind's me of that record you buy that on the first listen you know you need to immerse yourself more and once immersed grows to stand the test of time.
A book consisting of 8 vaguely interrelated short stories with a very seamless writing style that is easy to read.
Though a satire on the UN and specific to that organisation, in my opinion this read can be related to anyone that has had a long working life in either the private sector or the public. The petty bureaucrats, empire builders, those that moan about how hard they work but do little, gossipers, all are covered in a delightful and gentle read that I think would appeal to most. I recognised so many people from my 40 years working life. My first Shirley Hazard and I will be reading more. Terrific writing.
I had seen the TV series that this book was based on and had to admit to myself that that was all I had to offer in terms of knowledge on the subject. So the book was going to be hopefully a more than useful beginner's guide and it has turned out to be so. Each chapter was full of subject matter that made me realise I need to dig deeper into the Great War. The book itself covers mostly the political events and the major battles with the cultural events hardly covered. Fair enough I suppose. 330 pages cannot be enough to cover such a momentous event, an event that has had consequences even now, one hundred years later.
As I beginner I found myself realising that from an English speaking perspective and living in Australia the vast majority of what little I did know was British and ANZAC. This book makes me want to expand to the eastern front and look further into the Russian Revolution. The French took a hideous smashing on the western front and that to needs further reading. I think that war weariness played a huge part in how they approached WW2.
With that, anyone with deep knowledge of the subject may find this a bit too beginner friendly so I would not recommend it to the well-read. I also found a couple of indexing errors that should not have occurred and there is no bibliography though the footnotes do cover that area fairly well. A solid though not spectacular read and glad to have read it. I now understand the lure of the Great War to those that have immersed themselves into its dense written history.
I would suggest that this very readable book should be a must for anyone that has an interest in the subject of Van Diemen's Land colonial history. Author Leonie Stevens has written a compelling argument that the original VDL peoples were not down trodden by British colonialism when exiled to Flinders Island but became a free people who fought for their rights via the pen and other nonviolent methods once exiled to the remote Wybalenna settlement. In fact the hardy survivors finally received their ultimate freedom after a 15 year campaign that lead to a return to the mainland. This is the story itself and presented in chronological order.
Leonie Stevens is to be congratulated on what can only be described as utterly brilliant research. Using new sources from the VDL peoples themselves, such as the Flinders Island Chronicle, the author has brought to life the peoples by telling their story through their own words. As she writes “Academic rigour rarely, it seems, extends to consulting First Nation sources.” This book does just that. The first peoples come to life in this excellent book. We read and hear if we listen close “.... A vibrant, noisy and often rebellious community”. I came away from this read with a feeling that the first nation women were especially independent and hardy. Serial monogamy seemed to me to be just as much a women's prerogative. As to the sealer women's independent nature these remarkable ladies deserve a book on their lives alone.
Monash University Publishing have the footnotes on the page being read as opposed to forcing the reader to the back of the book. I found not an error in the index. The primary and secondary sources in the bibliography are magnificent and if the subject is of further interest the reader has a resource that is second to none. This is as good as it gets and leaves some more famous historians and publishers for dead. If this fails to win awards into the future then the Australian publishing industry has no idea and needs to have a long hard look at itself. A brilliant book.
The story of the Cleaver Family as narrated by one of the three sons James.
A strange book that never held me as much as I expected after a riveting first couple of chapters. At times the writing absolutely enthralled me but the plot less so. Plot? More family history with stream of conscious narrative thrown in. The main focus of attention has Cleaver families past, present, its land and its wealth explained. What is Oceana Fine? It is a high grade of wheat. With that the author's descriptive prose gave me as the reader a sense of the wide open fields that stretched and the endless blue sky as an entity as big as the universe. But the fantasy that was inserted seemed to meander to the point I was lost in its point as to the plot. I get why this would have won a Miles Franklin Award back in 1990. The judges, I could imagine, would have found the prose a challenge up their alley. Sadly not mine. I wish it was otherwise. Maybe a reread one day would be more rewarding?
Author Helen Daniel discusses how she came to read Ireland and eventually meet him. In short she believes him to be a subversive novelist and discusses this throughout her treatise on Ireland's work. Interestingly when she met him for the first time she said she was “....armed, ready for a subversive figure, devious or chameleon....” She in fact found him to be a rather unassuming individual. What she noticed, when he answered her questions, was that he was prone to question his own answers to her. With that he gave the impression of being interested in how people dealt with constant change. To me this was an interesting observation by Daniel, the fact that Ireland himself was an observer of the people around him. All of his novels for me have been written in that context as I always felt that Irelands works were about the individuals he had met and that he had written about them in a way that challenged the reader to recognise themselves and others in his writing.
Daniel then goes on to state that Ireland is one of a recent group of Australian authors who present their novels and short stories as “deliberate fabrications”. Included in this group along with Ireland are names such as Frank Moorehouse, Peter Mather, Murray Bail, Peter Carey, David Foster and Michael Wilding. These writers present their deliberate fabrications against our reality.
Ireland in a ‘Statement” to the Australian Literary Studies in vol. 8 October 1977 wrote about being influenced by the writings of Laurence Sterne and Machado de Assis. Writing of de Assis he said he felt affinity towards his “......humorous and humane pessimism, the completely disenchanted author, the economy of means, the classic point of view, the tragedy and self-betrayal the monumental indifference of the environment to the individuals welfare.....”. This statement by Ireland resonates with me as a reader of all the books discussed in this review of his work.
Each novel is reviewed with considerable depth from Ireland's first The Chantic Bird through to City of Women. Helen Daniel even discussed his play Image in the Clay and his three short stories published such as The Bronze Overcoat (1980) from the Bulletin, The Wild Colonial Boy from The national Times (1981) and Injections from The Bulletin (1981). I had no knowledge of these short stories and will now pursue them. Daniel also discusses four unpublished works called death by a Thousand Cuts, The Slow Eggs, The Survivors and The New Aristocrats. Is there a publisher with courage out there? I doubt it.
Daniel has included excellent notes and a Select Bibliography that is a very good resource for the completist such as myself. Very much a must have for anyone that has an interest in the fiction of David Ireland. https://www.goodreads.com/review/list/6852430?shelf=david-ireland
Interesting at times but I think the subject deserves a far better writer and one with less emotional involvement. The Japanese were “Brave...” “..but exceedingly stupid”. The author thought that British imperialism was less ‘blatant' than that of other nations. Used the old analogy of “One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter” when trying to defend one enemy's actions against the paras but calling others terrorists and even hooligans at other times. Only recommended for those with a definite interest in the subject matter.
This is the first ever published work by the truly underappreciated Australian literary great, David Ireland. This is a play. Both the original producer and David Ireland himself write a preface in my very battered edition. The producer mostly covers the trials and tribulations of starting the play but Ireland's is by far the most interesting in that he explains his writings. I found him articulating what it is that I have always enjoyed and admired about his novels. On this play he writes “No opinions are presented: my interest in aborigines is no more than anyone else's, except that they are people. That is my interest” Considering at this point in time I have read 8 of his novels and now this play, I am of the opinion that that sentence has summed up all his writings so far. For example if that statement he has made had one word, ‘aborigines' changed to any of the following:- ‘workers' ‘drunks' ‘women' ‘red setters' whatever; his novels will not have changed one iota in that he is an observer of people and has written about them in his then surroundings.
The Unknown Industrial Prisoner for example, is everything I personally have observed in my working life in manufacturing. Ireland was able to work in an oil refinery and observe his fellow workers in his own surroundings.
With that this play and the novel that it consequently led to, Burn, are not written in a manner that I have become used to with Ireland. There has been a sense of ‘knife to the heart' REALISM in both the play and Burn. All other novels are written with short sharp chapters that made it all read very fragmented, sometimes surreal and almost modernist. This play and the novel Burn are far from that. They are brutally realistic and view the issues with indigenous life with brutality in a way that I find very disconcerting. There are no role models. Gunner, the main character, is not interested in life outside his own plot of dirt. His entire family are dragged along with that to a degree. The play is explicitly hard edged in its observation of indigenous camp life. Considering that Ireland had worked cutting timber in the late 1940' his comment above is striking. He makes no opinion, this is all observation because they are and were the people that he had an interest in while in his surroundings along the Murrumbidgee River. It was all about the individual as dirt, images in the clay.
With that comes one of the most poignant moments of the play. The youngest son has returned from the city. His name is Gordon and he returns with gifts for all, a few beers, a pipe for the old man, a dress for his mum. After a while the truth comes out. He was never a big shot in the city but just another no one. And with that a Black no one. “They looked at me and they didn't see a better suntan then they had” “What they saw was dirt” He caught that questioning look as to why didn't he wash. He did, scrubbing himself to soreness. He changed jobs in hope of conforming “but that made no difference... if only I could sing” “They think I am straight from the dead heart of the country” when he was far from that. Gordon explains to his family that he cannot throw a boomerang, has never been to a corrobboree nor seen a didgeridoo. But white man thinks he is “primitive” and should be kept away from the women and kids. “I'll tell you where the dead heart of Australia is! It's right back there in the city” BAM! This is still relevant to today's Australia. An urban society that promotes itself as anything but. Images in the clay!
I read Burn, the novel that morphed from this play and consider it superb. My review here. https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1700744060?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1
Why Irelands play and novel on indigenous Australia has disappeared into obscurity is a tragedy, but then tragedy are both the play and the novel if the truth be told.
A very enjoyable selection of the travel writings of Australian Peter Pinney. I look forward to reading the source material itself. Selected from four of Pinney's books by John Borthwick who complied these excerpts after the author's death in 1992. For me a first time reader of the author, this has been a very good taste of what awaits. Pinney returned from active service in WW2 and decided to take the road to anywhere with just a passport and the clothes on his back. We get tales of his wanderings through the Middle East, south Asia, Africa to the Caribbean and the Pacific. There is wit and daring and arrogant audacity galore. For anyone that likes a good travel compendium the comparatively unknown Peter Pinney is well worth your time.
Page 146. Pinney visits a zoo in Martinique and is appalled at the state of the facilities. He observes “Birds of a diverse nature were caged together, so confined that the weaker could not escape the strong; a constant social torture reduced the weaker to shivering, jerking neurotics. Pecking feather-pulling, blinding one another: birds could be quite human, I discovered.”
In the Afterword the authors final sentence makes interesting reading. “Unearthed after nearly two centuries of established history, the Vandemonian War allows us to see that a society can be led to do almost anything – and then come to believe it did not do it at all.” In my opinion this final comment is not aimed at British historians but at Australian. This book is about Britain's treatment of Tasmanian aboriginals but the reality is in that the great big world of British history this event is but a mere sideshow. In Australian history it has loomed larger in academic circles.
This is only the second book I have read on this subject. The first being the The Fabrication Of Aboriginal History: Volume One: Van Diemen's Land by Keith Windshuttle. This book caused considerable debate and was part of something rather puerile in Australian academia called the History Wars. These history wars were held in the 90's and early 2000's (from memory) and consisted of Australians being asked to forget the bad things from the past and, to put it facetiously, be happy. “Ignore the black arm band view of history” was the mantra. I personally found this nonsense. History throughout the world and from the dawns of time is black armband even if we individually don't like to read or hear that. History is history and no one can change their past. Learn from it I say. With that when I read Windshuttle book I recall I found it far too reliant on colonial newspaper sources at the times of the Vandemonian Wars. To me it was the equivalent of relying on Pravda to tell the story of the USSR.
A chronological history is presented with heavy research with quotes galore. In fact this leads to a very dry and dense read that the casual reader may not enjoy. The majority of the research is from surviving records in the Tasmanian Archive and Heritage Office at the state library and with that these are from the Colonial Secretaries Office, The Governor's Office with the addition of convict and police records. We do not get an overview nor a populist history. Typical of a book as well researched as this the source material is very interesting and also the various individuals whom are involved. Jorgen Jorgenson for example.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B8rgen_J%C3%B8rgensen
Jorgenson played a prominent role in the wars and at one point is quoted as saying “....the delusion kept by the public prints, limiting the number of Aborigines of this island to about two or three hundred..” with the author saying that this was an “...indicator that the war as it appeared in the newspaper could be quite different from the one fought on the ground”
In fact it seems that the violence of the war had an effect on public opinion because the Aboriginal Committee in Hobart suggested that “resident settlers of similar humane feelings....to adhere to a system of self-defence and not wanton aggression”
As time went on comment as to the war became pointed in colonial circles. A correspondent to the Launceston Advertiser asked “Are the unhappy creatures the subjects of our king, in a state of rebellion? Or are they injured people, whom we have invaded and with whom we are at war?” At the same time the Hobart Tasmanian made the case for either “.....offensive prosecution of the war, even to extermination....” or defensive measures. Not long after this comment in 1831, roving parties reported areas of the island with no aboriginal tribes and later capture parties began to bring in groups that were “disproportionately male with no children”. The author called this a “collapse of demographic normality”. By this time the war was at an end; other than a few isolated incidents that came to the attention of the authorities and press. The Launceston Examiner wrote in 1844 ‘the black war will not be soon forgotten by those that shouldered the musket and kept watch during the campaign.' With that I ask how could Keith Windshuttle have not noticed comment like this when researching his book? In fact Brodie's book has quoted several colonial newspapers reference to the war. I am not sure how Windshuttle could have interpreted these comment in any other way.
For those interested these are some professional reviews of the book.
http://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/books/the-vandemonian-war-review-nick-brodies-study-of-brutal-fighting-in-tasmania-20170927-gypyfv.html?logout=true
https://www.australianbookreview.com.au/abr-online/current-issue/4241-billy-griffiths-reviews-the-vandemonian-war-the-secret-history-of-britain-s-tasmanian-invasion-by-nick-brodie
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/arts/review/book-reviews-hidden-in-plain-view-dark-emu-vandemonian-war/news-story/1b8ba942884be79a05b69f20b5b447ab
https://www.thesaturdaypaper.com.au/2017/08/31/the-vandemonian-war/15024600005039
An interview with the author.
http://www.insidehistory.com.au/2017/08/the-vandemonian-war-the-secret-history-of-tasmanias-colonisation/
During a weekend trip to Wellington New Zealand from Brisbane in April 2014 my wife and I took a guided tourist mini bus for the afternoon as we were unfortunately short on time to make our own personal tour. The guide was very good. He took us to some great spots and we enjoyed his tour and soaked in his knowledge. As he dropped us off at our central motel I noticed a book on the front seat and leaving the mini bus asked if it was any good. “I wrote it” he cheerfully said and I quickly took the name down so as to research later. I eventually got a copy of his book and have to say I have enjoyed it.
In hindsight the author, Nathan Hoturoa Grey, looked the part to trek the entire length of The Great Wall of China. Slim and fit, articulate and seemed to have a sense of humour though his humour was tested many times during his trek. Starting out with 4 other companions Nathan covers his journey with a diary form presentation that makes this easy to read. We get told a little history, Nathan's observations along with his own spiritual trials and tribulations. I wish I had been able to talk to Nathan about his journey. A good read and recommended for those that like travel/adventure.
http://www.greatwalldvd.com/
The final in a very good trilogy on the three phases of China under Mao.
I turned 17 when Mao died. After his death I recall the trials of the Gang of Four even receiving coverage on the very limited news services in Brisbane Australia. It was very exotic (for want of a better word) and in a faraway country I had not really given any thought to at the time. It seemed such an odd name. Gang of Four! One had images of four young hoodlums holding up old ladies for the small change in their purses. It was a name I associated as an insult by the new regime. Nope! On page 306 of this fascinating read it says that it was coined by Mao himself. “Mao was playing one faction off against the other in the hope that none would be strong enough to challenge him” the author write. And that was the politics of The Cultural Revolution. Mao playing one faction off against another. To the detriment of the population at large.
This review hardly needs to explain the Cultural Revolution, there are plenty of resources out there. But books such as this do throw up events and individuals that play minor roles in the narrative but are nonetheless part of the complex history told. Damansky Island incident in March 1969 for example. In chapter 16 Preparing For War the author discusses the usual political machination and propaganda that Mao used in pursuit of his domestic goals. The USSR and China had disputed the island previously but now Chinese troops eventually shot at a border post. Two weeks later the clashes involved thousands of troops. Soon after Mao called a halt. “He had achieved his aim, which was to put the Soviet Union on notice.....” and as soon as the confrontation was over the internal propaganda came to the fore. “Prepare for War” became the new slogan. All this to control the outcome of the Ninth Party Congress that was due two weeks later. The only problem was the USSR took all this very seriously as one would expect and a few months later the USSR actually asked the USA how it would feel if they took out a Chinese nuclear facility. The US ignored the question. Then Pravda began a campaign against the Chinese and appealed to the world to understand the threat the Chinese had become. “The chairman was stunned.” wrote the author. This was after all a border dispute, useful for the Machiavellian politics of Mao, not an all-out war with a vastly superior opponent. China agreed to talk and concessions were made. But Mao, ever the paranoid leader put the country on a war footing nonetheless with both the USSR and the USA at the end of the internal propaganda.
My one fault with the book for me is a big one and marks it down from outstanding. During the narrative the author uses the term Mao's Great Famine to describe the terrible years of the Great Leap Forward. This is the title of his excellent book of the same name. I had no issue with the use of that in that book but not in this one. It reeks of self-promotion when there was no need. I have also put the term in search engine and each search comes to his book. For the trilogy to be considered a definitive history of China under Mao there was no need for such promotion. A small quibble some may say.
In the end though I have come out of the trilogy repeating what I have said before. Why read fantasy when there is the history of China. To think I know so little and have so much more to read.
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/956365172
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1136459316?book_show_action=false&from_review_page=1
Winner of the 1960 Miles Franklin award. With that I have enjoyed this coming of age tale but do have some thoughts that it may not have made the long list let alone won in this more enlightened age.
There are several themes running through this book. The aforementioned coming of age. Changing technology. Alcoholism and how it effects ones relationship with one's family, friends and work colleagues. There is also racism and racist language.
The changing of technology, the coming of age, alcoholism and the effect on family and friends is woven into the story in a seamless manner that makes this generally dialog driven book an easy read. When Teamsters are replaced by the motor vehicle, an already heavy drinking teamster is driven further into the depths of his despair by leaving the town and his family to live a past life. The youngest son goes on a search for him that takes many years. With that we see the son grow from a school boy to a man. With that come the various trials and tribulations that he has to deal with. In truth a story from any age.
The racist language in the book. This language was the language of the times. In this case the gulf country of north Queensland circa 1920's. I have had a discussion with my wife. She is of the opinion that modern readers should not let themselves get too uncomfortable and accept that language for what it was, rural Australia in the 1920's. But I admit I just struggled. The use of terms such as nigger and gin had me squirming, by nature I would never use these terms to describe Australian indigenous people let alone anyone else. Language such as that goes against the grain. I can hardly be too critical of my wife for her opinion. She escaped a very small country town in Queensland during the mid-1980's, one reason being the inherent racism. But as she told me the term gin was used in everyday talk with hardly a murmur. I still feel uncomfortable with those terms nonetheless. At one point in the story an indigenous girl commits suicide after being rejected by the boy who has got her pregnant. After only a small feeling of guilt the boy involved moves on so rapidly to not caring it is a shock to me as the reader. The racist language and the racist attitude! Just part of life. As one reads the book further the day to day racism appears as naturally as the sun rising each day. Indigenous people are used as cheap labour and generalised as no hopers.
I found this book hard to find initially but finally found a battered copy in thrift shop. I see that it has not been republished since the late 1970's. In my opinion that is a pity. It deserves a modern Australian reader to read about the issues of the past that are not that far removed from those of the present. It may also need a new reader to understand that the changes that have occurred to Australian language since this books release in 1960. The author Elizabeth O'Conner according to her wiki lived on a cattle station in Queensland's gulf country in 1942 were she raised four children. I have no doubt she has articulated gulf country attitudes in her story, natural racism, heavy drinking and innate conservatism. Times have changed and for the better in my opinion.
Recommended for those with an interest in Australian literature.
A book split into 3 parts, with before, during and after scenarios. Copious footnotes, maps galore and 36 appendices. 2 sections of plates. Obviously well researched. This long book is on a very interesting subject that should have been right up my reading alley. It wasn't.
My complaints are many. I thought the author Norman Davies got bogged down far too often. Trying to justify his opinion over and over again became repetitive. The first part discussing east west European alliances should have been a brief history. Author Davies gave us history back as far as the nineteenth century and even at one point called Tsarist Russia a “liberalising regime”. No doubt that can be debated but in the context of the book it was pointless. We, the reader got page after page of in depth analysis of these Western / Eastern machinations that were interesting in themselves but I was wanting to read a book on the lead up to Warsaw Rising. I can read many general histories of Grand Alliances.
That leads to the 2nd part of the book that was about the rising itself. I came out the end of this vital part of the book a bit perplexed. It seemed I had read little on the military aspect of the event. Or at least if I did it got lost in the rhetoric. Also at this point the author included “Capsules”. Short stories from eye witness's for example. Interesting in themselves but interfered with the flow. And when they came they sometimes made little sense as to the general gist of the history being told.
The final part took in the aftermath, everything from the treatment of Poland by the USSR through to the thoughts and memories of the survivors. This part of the book I found the most interesting but even then it was padded with “capsules” and long rhetorical treatise by the author about the mistreatment of Poland by both East and West.
Some final complaints. Why not trust the reader to understand Polish names, “Premier Mick” for example drove me up the wall. “First Ally” instead of Poland's name itself being used. Poems are nice but they just added to the length of an already long book. So many pointless analogies. The main text ended on an analogy and I just shook my head and thought why insult my intelligence. All this, and a few more things I have no doubt forgotten, made me question who this book was aimed at. I like to think that I am fairly well read on WW2 history but I had this feeling that the book was aimed at a sympathetic audience that was going to lap up the rhetoric no matter what. A form of confirmation bias? I mean the book is hardly for WW2 beginners but to not use Polish names throughout the text insults the intelligence of the amateur historian with good knowledge.
Now I am not going to say that others should not read this book. It is a very interesting subject. Anyone with any interest in the Poland and the Eastern Front should get something out of this book no matter it being a long slog. I learnt a lot. I learnt a heck of a lot to put it bluntly. And with that learning it is hard not to think that the author is right in the final treatise that he calls Interim Report. The treatment of Poland in terms of the political machinations of the west was weak kneed at best. At worst it was darn right Machiavellian. As to the Nazis and the USSR? History has been the judge and they are damned forever for their inhumanity to their fellow man. The criminal treatment of the people of Poland had no justification. May the perpetrators of such inhumanity rot for eternity.