Wednesday, 3 February 2016

Steve Toltz's Quicksand

What we read over summer

We started the meeting by sharing the books we'd read (and enjoyed) over summer:
  • Emma Ayres' Cadence (memoir, via audiobook)
  • Charles Dickens' Dombey and son (a classic)
  • Anthony Doerr's All the light we cannot see (Pulitzer Prize winner)
  • Robert Drewe's The book of the beach (short stories with beach themes)
  • Audrey Hawkridge's Jane and her gentlemen (the men in Jane Austen's life and books)
  • Gail Jones' Guide to Berlin (particularly excellent if you know Berlin a little)
  • Barbara Kingsolver's Prodigal summer (environmentalists and farmers in the Appalachians)
  • Jhumpa Lahiri's Unaccustomed earth (short stories about Bangladeshis in the USA)
  • Stephen Orr 's The hands (Australian multigenerational farm story)
  • Magda Szubanski's Reckoning (memoir)
  • Jenny Uglow's A gambling man: Charles II and the Restoration (biography)


Steve Toltz's second novel Quicksand is one of those books that divided Minervans. Indeed, a few members gave up on the book, deciding life was too short to devote to it. Others really enjoyed it, though most agreed its extensive use of lists (which we believe is a literary technique called asyndeton), in particular, did try us at times. At around 440 pages it is significantly shorter than Toltz's 700+ page debut novel, A fraction of the whole, which we read back in 2009.

Quicksand is the story of anti-hero, Aldo Benjamin, told partly by his schoolfriend, Liam Wilder, and partly by himself. Meeting at high school, Aldo and Liam remain friends from then until the book closes when they are in their early to mid 40s. The novel focuses on the ups and downs - mostly downs - of Aldo's life as he tries to make his way against what he sees as the tide of fate or bad luck. The novel starts when they are in their early 40s and Aldo, a paraplegic in a wheelchair, has just been released from prison. We don't know how long he's been in a wheelchair or how it came to be, and we don't know why he was in prison. These come out in the course of the novel which flashes back to their schooldays and then moves between the past and present to tell the story. At the beginning of the novel we learn that Liam is trying to restart his  writing career, with Aldo as his subject, much to Aldo's resigned disgust: "I'm nobody's muse", he says. Ironically, though, not only is he Liam's muse but he also becomes one for his musician wife, Stella. 

Aldo gets into all sorts of strife in the novel, but is regularly bailed out by friends (including Liam, Dr Castles, his old school teacher, and so on) and lovers (including Stella and Mimi). One member asked why people keep rescuing him. Is there something in it for them?

What is it about?

Overall, we (including those who abandoned it) agreed that it is an original, witty, dark novel about the human condition or "why are we here". Steve Toltz, one member told us, describes it this way"A Fraction of the Whole was a book, for me, about the fear of death ... As soon as I finished, I wanted the next book to be about the fear of life." She'd also read that while he was writing A fraction of the whole Toltz had experienced a spinal haemorrhage which had left him paralysed for some time. This enabled him to write knowledgeably about Aldo's wheelchair life as a paraplegic, though Toltz says that the book is not autobiographical. We hoped not, because it is rather brutal in places!

In addition to Toltz's self-proclaimed overall theme being "the fear of life", several other themes and motifs run through the book. The biggest one is the idea of suicide, which ties in exactly with "fear of life". Aldo attempts suicide multiple times in the novel, but somehow, despite the travails of his life, finds himself attracted to the idea of immortality. Other themes and ideas we found include friendship (particularly male friendship); fate or bad luck; the nature of "art" (in its broad meaning, including writing and music), artists and making art; entrepreneurialism; religion and the nature of God.

We talked a little about religion in the novel - Aldo's agnosticism, the new religion he creates (ironically, his only successful venture) with a personalised God, the idea that his months of living on a rock at Magic Beach in the sea suggests Christ's time in the wilderness - and concluded that the book is in part about finding meaning in life, about how we bumble along in the dark, inventing meaning for ourselves.

And then there's the writing ...

The biggest challenge some found with the book was its denseness. We discussed our changed 21st century attention spans and how we are less attuned to the big rambling novels of the 19th century. But even those who found its length and detail off-putting did find aspects to enjoy. We all enjoyed the humour. Some may have found more humour than others, but we all found some! Everyone enjoyed, for example, Aldo's (failed) business ideas - like the device that was supposed to detect the presence of peanuts in food, or clothing for obese toddlers, or maternity clothes for goths ("a demographic with an 85% abortion rate")! You get the drift? It is a satirical novel, poking fun at, skewering in fact, our 21st century pretensions, concerns, and tribulations.

One member enjoyed the made-up words like "businesssapiens". And those of us who got to it laughed at the "Fussy corpse" picture book for children. The comedy is dark, but it's there.

However, there are gruelling and brutal scenes too, such as (without giving away spoilers) the still-birth of a child, and a prison rape scene.

Toltz mixes up the style. Most of the novel is told first person by Liam, but there are first person sections by Aldo, such as his long statement in court at his trial. There are also sections of play-like dialogue (such as between Aldo and the Voice), and of poetry. One member decided that Toltz is a little hyperactive.

We also discussed the characters, and whether any were sympathetic. Some felt all the main characters were, in the sense that they are ordinary, flawed people trying to make the best of their lives, but we also considered that, being the satire it is, engaging with characters is not necessarily the main expectation.

And, for those of us who made it to the last line, we loved its optimism after all the cynicism and "clinical frustration" that preceded it. It made everyone smile - even those who first heard it on the night!

Wednesday, 25 November 2015

The lives of others, by Neel Mukherjee

Before I launch into a report of our discussion, I need to 'fess up that I didn't manage to finish the book in time so if this report doesn't make sense in places I hope others will expand on their ideas in the Comments.

The lives of others is a long book - around 550 pages - and proved to be a challenging read, although not so challenging that we didn't appreciate it. One member "kind of read it twice", while a couple of us didn't quite finish it, not because we didn't want to, we hastened to explain but because we'd misjudged the time we'd need to do it justice.

However, before I elaborate more on our discussion, it might be useful to say a little about its content. The book is set in Bengal in the mid to late 1960s and is essentially the saga of a once well-to-do family. As the novel opens, they live in a four-storey house in South Calcutta. The family comprises the patriarch and matriarch, their five sons/daughters and their respective families. Location in the house is hierarchical, with Purba, the widow of the youngest son, occupying the worst position in the house and treated accordingly. I say "once well-to-do", as the family had made a good living out of business, but things are not going so well by the time the novel opens, which of course adds to the stress in their lives.

A big Indian saga

Most of us enjoyed the book but, as already said, we all admitted to being challenged, though not always for exactly the same reasons. It's not that it's a hard read in terms of language or style, but:

  • we all found it hard to keep all the characters, whose names were not familiar to us, clear in our heads. Some of us didn't find the family tree until part way through the novel, or even until the end. This is what resulted in one of us turning right around and reading it again!
  • the novel is told in two parallel, alternating sequences - a third person story about the family as a whole, and a first person story told by a son of the family who joins a group of socialist activists working to improve the lot of poor farmers. These two sequences are differentiated by font - in the print and kindle versions, but not in the iPad version. Hmm!
  • it contains a LOT of detail, which made it dense reading for some - so much so that a few wondered, briefly at least, whether ALL the detail was necessary.
  • it is harrowing, in parts, particularly in the last 100 pages.

Like most sagas, the novel covers a lot of ground - hierarchical relationships between people (within the family, family and servants, workers and their employers, and so on); gender; religion; political rebellion; the role of education; the increasing distance between the haves and have-nots.

What we liked

We enjoyed the detailed depiction of family life and relationships, and felt that this reminded us of some of the big Russian and English novels of the nineteenth century.

We were impressed by Mukherjee's language and extensive (impressive) vocabulary.

One member shared a favourite quote:

not for the first time it struck Adi that clichés were clichés because they were truths that had been lived out by generation after generation of people before him. By the time those lived truths were inherited by him, they had become foxed, crumpled, brown and brittle with age.

We all liked this description of what happens when cliches, which spring from some sort of truth, outlive their usefulness and in, fact, outlive the truth upon which they were initially built. 

One member found the scenes describing the young socialist men working with farmers in the villages to be among the book's most powerful.

The novel's prologue effectively establishes the idea of inhumanity and inequality as main themes. 

What is it about, or, why did Mukherjee write the novel

We spent a lot of time discussing what we thought the novel was about. Some members felt it offers a pessimistic view of life and that, while it is primarily set in the 1960s, the 2012 epilogue suggests that things have not changed. Others saw it as being more fatalistic, that life is a roll of the dice, with good and bad "chances" or outcomes over which people may not always have a lot of control. While some looked for a "message" or, at least, to understand why Mukherjee wanted to tell the tale, others were happy to see it as a novel which asks questions without attempting to answer them.

We wondered how Indian readers understand the novel. A member shared an Indian critic's review which expressed concern that Mukherjee treated the escape of one "miracle boy" to America through his impressive maths ability as a one-off whereas India, and Bengal in particular, has a long tradition of intellectual achievement in mathematical thinking. What did Mukherjee mean to convey by his two epilogues - one about this escape and the other about a violent terrorist act - in terms of the meaning of the novel?

Another member shared a reviewer's summation that the book is about "the limits of empathy and the nature of political action". This resulted in quite a discussion about empathy in the book, particularly in terms of lack of empathy occurring in many of the characters, including even the so-called more enlightened ones. Political rebel Supratik, for example, showed little empathy for his family. (Is this what political idealism and action can do to people?)

We concluded by discussing this book's shortlisting in 2014 for the Man Booker prize, and that it lost to Richard Flanagan's The narrow road to the deep north (our report). Some felt that Mukherjee was by far the more worthy winner due to "flaws" in Flanagan's book, but others argued that both books have their flaws. Whatever the case, I can confirm that our discussion was lively and not always quiet - surely a sign that this was a very good choice for us to read. Now, all I and a couple of others need to do, is finish it!

Saturday, 14 November 2015

The strays by Emily Bitto

After a lovely tour of a gorgeous new home we settled down to discuss this month’s read of the debut and award winning novel by Australian author, Emily Bitto,  entitled The strays. 

Discussion began with our opinions of the book. The fairly unanimous opinion was that everyone enjoyed the read. The style of writing and turn of phrase was applauded. However, one or two members thought it was not up to the standard of an award. A couple of us felt it was a ‘little flat’. Too many things were not fully explained.  For instance, why did Lily explore the art scene in later life. (Afterwards I thought it was obvious – Lily associated art with glamour, intelligence and excitement.)

The novel is loosely based on the Bohemian lifestyle of John and Sunday Reed at Heide (a former dairy farm on the outskirts of Melbourne), in the 1930s. The strays novel begins in the thirties.  Sidney Nolan could be the model for Jerome?  Heide is now the Museum of Modern Art of Australia and is a beautiful place to visit.

One of the problems with this book was the implausibility of some of the characters. Lily’s parents were particularly hard to fathom or believe even for the times. They seemed to have a sense of relief that their daughter was not their responsibility. They were very conservative so it was surprising that they could allow their only daughter to live with an artist and his family. We discussed Lily and her feeling of being an outsider. Members of the group could relate to that feeling. One member related her experience of meeting people who she thought were extremely wealthy. They had intelligent  conversation and lots of house guests, and to her it was exciting to be in their company. This was very similar to Lily’s experience with the Trentham family. Lily was only an observer living with these people.  This becomes even more obvious at the end of the book when she was talking to Bea and the others about writing a memoir.

Living with the Trenthams was a life of possibility for Lily.  The house and the huge meals all seemed effortless so different from her lonely boring life with her parents.

One member enjoyed the book but had reservations.   It reminded her of hippie life in Byron Bay where life was full of strays.  Another member was wondering what it was really about – angst of an artistic life or a clash between sensible suburbia and bohemian life.

Another member was very enthusiastic about this book – it reminded her of ‘Brideshead revisited’ and also ‘Atonement’.  She thought it was about family and desire and connection to people, parental responsibility and friendship between girls. One of the good facets of the novel was the way the author describes the cultural isolation (in art terms especially) of Melbourne at the time. The family were living in a bubble.

The Prologue is very important. Here the author talks about the:
heart’s magnetic field …the body’s silent communications with other bodies are unmapped and mysterious …Who knows, what we call instant attraction may be as random as the momentary synchrony of two hearts’ magnetic pulses.
Does this explain Eva and Lily’s friendship, or Lily’s attraction to the whole Trentham family?

Eva’s mother is another interesting character – she is not a sympathetic character and hopeless as a parent. Evan is a bad father. The dinner party conversations (with the extra members of the ‘family’) and their behavior shows how dysfunctional the family really is. No-one is interested in the children.
Bitto explains the relationships between the family members really well and how they are all under stress, and not healthy.

We discussed the girls' relationships – Lily and Bea, the sad and unloved Heloise, and Lily herself –and Jerome, the ‘devil’ in the ‘mix’?  These relationships reminded one reader of a relationship between Jack Thompson and 2 sisters. Apparently there is also an instance of the poet Shelley ‘having’ two young women. According to the Oxford Handbook online Shelley was possibly one of the ‘pro-feminist of the male writers’ of the time. 

Jerome is totally unremorseful, a good artist who was expected to make money. Why did society allow him to get away with ‘taking’ young girls? Why did the family not object sooner? Even if Lily had told would the family have acted sooner? These questions cannot be answered.

The whole episode of Jerome absconding with the girls reminded us of incidents concerning supposed obscene art and photographs of children by Bill Henson which were censored in 2008 by the Labor government. (The exhibition was at the Roslyn Oxley Gallery in Paddington.) Interestingly, none of us thought that Jerome kidnapped Eva and Heloise, but they presumably went of their own volition. Jerome was 24 and the girls were 15 and 13. This sort of behavior happens. Evan and Helena wanted to keep the community intact and wanted to believe that their life was possible longterm. (It didn’t work for the Reeds for very long either.)

Central to the community idea is that this lifestyle upsets lives – relationships happen which are not meant to happen – Jerome and the girls, especially Heloise. I suppose this is reinforced by Lily’s first marriage to her romantic artist husband which didn’t succeed.  Life was better with her more boring second partner, an economist.

The life of the Trenthams is not a good model for society we decided. It is good to have challenging people around but you had better lock up your daughters. So is the meaning of this book about coming to terms with the past? Lily’s parents’ behavior is inexplicable. The three Trentham daughters lacked boundaries which ruined their lives ultimately.

Wednesday, 30 September 2015

Hanif Kureishi's The buddha of suburbia

Unusually, all Minervans who attended this month's meeting enjoyed the book, Hanif Kureishi's debut novel The buddha of suburbia. Despite the overall agreement, however, we managed to find things to discuss and even to disagree, a little anyhow, about.

We all agreed that we'd recommend it to others, though one member said she took a little while to get into it. She started to enjoy it, she said, when she "clicked" into the irony and satire.

Being women of a certain age, many of us had visited England in the 1960s or 1970s. We thought Kureishi's picture of London at that time was authentic, that he beautifully captured things like the mix of ethnic cultures, the rise of the punk culture, and the fashion (which he describes in some detail). We enjoyed the many cultural references to music, books, and London locations - and we used these to help pinpoint exact timings for the story. One member said that Kureishi captured the "seediness" of the England of the TV series, Till death do us part (1965-1975), thereby adding her own little cultural allusion. Sex features heavily in the novel, representing broad human experience and behaviour, some loving, some raunchy, some exploratory, some exploitative. The sex could be confronting at times, but is part of the liberated period in which it is set.

While the book is a coming-of-age novel for 17-year-old Karim (as he is when the novel opens), we felt that it is also about the fact that we are always "coming-of-age" or, shape-shifting or transforming. The title character, the buddha of suburbia (aka Haroon or Harry, Karim's father), is an example. He is experiencing a mid-life crisis in which he is searching for meaning, for being something more than a Civil Service clerk who will never be promoted above an Englishman. So, he sets himself up as a "buddha", as a "visionary" who will provide wisdom from the east. We enjoyed the humour of a Pakistani Muslim setting himself up as a Buddha.

It's also about culture and class, stereotyping and racism. Although Indians and Pakistanis had been living in London and England for a long time, they were still marginalised. Kureishi depicts this with humour, showing their marginalisation but sending it up at the same time. He shows the ignorance of English people who repeatedly called Karim "black", but he's more "beige" he says!

The thing was, we were supposed to be English, but to the English we were always wogs and nigs and Pakis and the rest of it.

We discussed how the book is also about people assuming the mantle of their culture and working out what they can do with it. One member shared a story from China in the 1980s. Chinese people, would ask, she said, for help to get to the USA. When asked what they'd do in America, they'd say, "We're Chinese, we can teach Tai Chi", regardless of whether they had the skills. Muslim Haroon subverts this idea of racial expectations/stereotyping by assuming the mantle of Buddha!

Another theme we discussed related to escaping suburbia for the excitement of the city where you might have a "new life". Suburbia is seen as dull, the place of the "miserable undead", where "people rarely dreamed of striking out for happiness". It's where kids from other cultures expected to be bullied. And yet, the suburb-city dichotomy is not seen as a simple one. Karim has some of his most meaningful engagements with family and friends in the suburbs. And the city has its challenges. It's not "the real world" according to his childhood friend Jamila. It has its poseurs, and racism can be just as rife.

We discussed the role of the arts. There's a certain cynicism about art and the entertainment industry, and yet there's also a sense that there could be salvation through literature and the arts. Charlie reinvents himself as punk star, Charlie Hero, though like most issues in the book there are two sides to this.
There were aspects which different members questioned or didn't like. One member, for example, found Shinko, Changez's Japanese whore/friend/partner to be unrealistic. Another found the section set in New York to be less interesting and wondered about its relevance, but others of us felt that this is where Karim started to really learn about himself and what he wanted. Yet another member was disappointed that Jamila married Changez, the man "arranged" for her from India, while others suggested that while she made her decision based on convention, that is, on obeying her father, she subverts the convention by the way she managed this marriage. One member asked why Changez, a Muslim man with certain expectations, accepted Jamil's conditions. We put forward a few possibilities, one being that Changez is not presented as a powerful, confident man, but one his Indian family would have been pleased to have got rid of.

Jamila, some thought, is a rather idealised character. She's "human" but not "real". Is this a fault of the novel, or a valid part of the satire and Kureishi's social agenda? She stands for confident, second generation, liberated immigrant womanhood.

We briefly discussed other characters. We felt for Karim's abandoned Mum - a quiet, undemanding, woman - and were glad when she'd found a toy-boy by the end. We thought Karim's actor friend, Terry, was genuine in his humanity. We worried about Eleanor who seemed to have no sense of self, one member likening her to Marianne Faithful!  We thought Anwar, Jamila's father and Karim's father's best friend, was the saddest character. He was resistant to change, and he's the character who doesn't end well, which perhaps suggests one of the messages of the book - if it can be said to have a message! We liked Karim's exuberance, though felt he often walked a fine line between charm and callousness.

Overall, we found this a funny, engaging book. We enjoyed the way Kureishi regularly subverted expected outcomes or challenged our expectations. We thought the ending was nicely ironic. Karim, we agreed had come to some self-growth, but his expectation that life will be less messy in the future is perhaps a vain hope (given the adults we've seen in the novel).

Thursday, 3 September 2015

The snow kimono by Mark Henshaw

This month’s novel was read by all the participants at our monthly meeting and many decided that it was much more fun than last time’s rather unusual book.

We began the night with some insights into the author – Kate heard him talk at a local bookshop recently about his work. The first chapter originated in 1990 and was published in an anthology. He was fortunate to spend 2 years in France on a scholarship but he has not visited Japan.

When he retired from the National Gallery in 2012 he began writing from the first chapter until he got to the end and later dropped the ‘Algerian chapter’ into the sequence. A Japanese friend did fact checking for him and many of us were surprised how well he can write about Japan. However he has worked with Japanese prints for many years at the Gallery as a curator for prints and drawings. His  visual orientation is in evidence in this novel – a reader can easily ‘see’ the landscape he describes so well. Those of us who have visited Japan thought he captured it beautifully.

Some members agreed that the Algerian chapter felt out of place but agreed that it was necessary as it added a complexity to the French detective Jovert, as we wouldn’t have known the importance of the first chapter without it. We commented also upon the fact that Jovert’s name is so similar to Javert from Les Miserables.  (Javert is 'the police inspector who becomes obsessed with the pursuit and punishment of the escaped convict Jean Valjean in Victor Hugo’s 1862 novel Les Miserables. From Wikipedia)

As we often do, we spent the evening trying to talk about scenes and characters as well as major themes and subtexts. One member felt ‘it’ was about the different ways the East and West perceive ‘things’.

Other themes :

  • Lies and truths: what is truth?
  • Memories: story-telling is moderated by memories, we doubt our storytellers? Henshaw is not documenting geography.
  • Meaning of life: can you understand your life as seen by another person?  This is mixed up with identity, especially in relation to the confession by Omura/Katsuo? (see chapter on Katsuo – ‘he used to entertain us with his impersonations’, loc 834, 23 % on Kindle)
  • Tension between the sexes: Role of women, in Japan, subjugated role of Geishas as well as women in ordinary society juxtaposed with Jovert’s wife’s post natal depression and her rejection of Jovert. Sachiko’s foster mother and her role in trying to find out what happened to her husband is in strong contrast to the usual role of women in this patriarchal society
  • Identity: Role of father/grandfather; shifting roles, including incest by Katsuo.


The twist at the end of the book was one of the most fascinating parts of our conversation this month. Was Tadashi Omura real or was he actually Katsuo Ikeda?  One member was not convinced that they were actually 2 people.  In many ways they seem like two sides of personalities – good versus bad. The passport found by Jovert after the death must be evidence that the inspector was misled all the time as was the reader?  Was the real Omura still living in Japan unaware that he was being portrayed yet again? Or had he met a sticky end?

There was also mention that Katsuo and Jovert had similarities and were not complementary characters. Both had killed people and had affairs, and felt guilty for their actions. Both had loved and lost too.

The scene on the bus driving in the terrible storm and snow was a very powerful one and we discussed it at some length. The knowledge gained later that Katsuo was on the bus seeing the accident when the boy was killed is vital for the story.

Sue had investigated the Text Publishing notes and questions and these were thought provoking. For instance:  What red herrings are put in to mislead the reader ? One clue which we picked up was the continual typing of ‘Omura’ heard by Jovert late into the night – more pertaining to a novelist such as Katsuo rather than a retired legal person – debatable? And this ‘Omura’ was always taking notes. Another clue was that this ‘Omura’ was not always complimentary about Katsuo but is this just part of the confidence trick being played on Jovert?  The brutal scene of the death of Hideo, was more believable coming from the true Omura?

Sue likened the writing to Ishiguro. She believes Henshaw conveys the same sort of sensibility. For instance, Henshaw describes the environment in a matter of fact way even though the scene may be horrific eg Sachiko’s death in the snow. He is lyrical and beautifully descriptive without being flowery.
Interestingly, some members felt it was such a complicated book that it was important to reread the first few chapters. One member did a descriptive list of the characters in order to keep the names and scenes - in a logical way - in her head. Others of us just ran with it -- fiction after all !

Another mention was the ‘hoax’ perpetrated by Katsuo. Apparently there was a poetry hoax in the 1990s in Japan? This is contrasted with the humiliation of Katsuo’s former teacher, Todo. His re-appearance towards the end may or may not be true – he could have been dead?

We all liked the language – succinct and meaningful in short direct sentences. I think you can feel that a lot of thought has gone into this aspect of the novel, probably as much as the plot.

Old fashioned letters play apart in this novel – we considered the one in the beginning to Jovert and the consequences of letters.

Is the snow kimono the central story of the novel? It is  certainly one of them, but there is so much more. That particular story has to do with women being groomed as well as wearing a creation of her grandmother’s (ancestral worship ?) and the Japanese love of exquisite beauty. Women as commodity? Is Sachiko a sacrificial virgin?  We were not sure.     
A final comment was most complimentary that  this was the best book we have read for a long time!

Sunday, 12 July 2015

Northanger Abbey by Jane Austen

All quotes are from the Folio society publication, 1975.

A group of five Minervans enjoyed discussing this classic novel written in 1798. The discussion rambled around all of Jane Austen’s works. Sue, our resident Jane Austen expert, was able to expand on many of the wonderful aspects of the novels and the many interweavings. Although Northanger Abbey was written when Jane was just 23 it was edited and revised when she was dying and only published in 1817. In a way it reminds Sue of Austen’s juvenilia but more controlled and with exuberance – it is a real hoot!

It is considered a Gothic spoof by some and the concept of ‘Gothic’ intrigued us. A definition includes the idea of suspense, old ruins, high emotion and ‘over-the-top-ness’ or exaggeration. For instance, during the journey to the Abbey, Henry Tilney describes the abbey to Catherine in melodramatic language, so she is at an unusual level of high emotion when she investigates a ‘large high chest’ in her bedroom

the sight of it made her start; and, forgetting every thing else, she stood gazing on it in motionless wonder, while these thoughts crossed her: This is strange indeed!’ (page 142)

Even the mention of this type of Renaissance furniture alludes to Gothic novels.

The more serious reflection and ‘true Gothic moment’ is Henry's realization that Catherine has surmised that his mother was murdered by the General. However, this is not a Gothic novel, he tells her, this is England. Nationalistic feelings were important.

The literary influences on this book were the Gothic novels of Anne Radcliffe including The mysteries of Udolpho which was also a favourite novel for the young female characters in Northanger Abbey.

In artistic terms Austen straddles the Regency period (classical – late eighteenth century) and the highly Romantic period (beginning of the nineteenth century). In this novel Austen uses irony and observations to clearly point out satiric moments and provide the reader with much enjoyment. Sue also noticed how often the colour red was important – for example red poppy and frequent blushing by the girls.

Catherine’s education in the world's ways is the central crux and this ‘coming of age’ is tested when she is forced to leave Northanger Abbey, literally turfed out by General Tilney. Can she cope with the trip? Yes she does. In a ‘Gothic’ novel she may not have coped so well, but this is realism.

We all enjoyed the pleasure of reading this book. Four really enjoyed the reread. It made Denise giggle and we all loved the funny scenes. Sandy didn’t like Northanger Abbey at first but gradually it grew on her. She is a big fan of Thomas Hardy.

The setting of Bath is glorious – it was just beginning to become the town it still is today when Jane Austen was writing this novel. The pump room was just becoming popular.

The central character of Catherine Morland moves from boyish child (ie tomboy?) playing ‘base ball’ (page 13 ) to a very naïve young woman of seventeen to a wiser girl over the period of the novel. The experiences and the men she meets do teach her some lessons in adult behaviour. John Thorpe teaches her how not to behave and Henry Tilney acts like an older brother, caring but also playful. For example, John was not reliable and left her at a dance. We appreciated that Catherine held her own opinions quite often and did not waver easily. Maybe more than we did at the same age?

The other main character is Henry Tilney and we remarked how patronizing and sarcastic Henry is towards Catherine. He is considerably older and she is young and silly – he is satirical and reminiscent of other characters in Austen’s novels, such as Mr Knightley in Emma and Edmund in Mansfield Park. He also teases Catherine and she falls for it often.

Mrs Allen is an empty head – not unlike Mrs Bennet we decided - interested in gowns and gossip and not much else. General Tilney’s behaviour is shocking and it was clever writing that he was tricked by John Thorpe twice. John Thorpe is an unreliable person and deserves his reputation.

Another feature we discussed was the word ‘nice’. As in the speech from Eleanor Tilney to Catherine:

‘The word “nicest”, as you used it, did not suit him (ie Henry Tilney) ; and you had better change it as soon as you can, or we shall be overpowered with Johnson and Blair all the rest of the way.’ (page 95).

Many of us have had similar discussions with relations about 'nice' words.

This novel is wonderful social history even though Austen doesn’t mention politics and isn’t writing history. It shows the power of the aristocracy and the newly wealthy having such power over everyone who wanted to be upwardly mobile. The Thorpe family are prime examples of the genteel poor trying to acquire money through marriage. It also shows that some things never change -- people are still influenced by money and status.

CE Brock illustration, c 1909, from
The other aspect of this novel is Austen’s own defence of the novel. This is in chapter 5 when Catherine is beginning to form her first friendship in Bath. Her new friend Isabella also liked to read novels. It is over a page of strong language from Austen which is alluded to later by Catherine and Henry when discussing young men reading novels. Sue told us this passage is famous, for Austen’s arguments have carried weight ever since. Liking novels is also a commendable personal attribute in this novel – Henry does and John Thorpe does not.

“Alas! If the heroine of one novel be not patronized by the heroine of another , from whom can we expect protection and regard ? … And what are you reading , Miss, --------- ?’ ‘Oh! It is only a novel !’ replies the young lady; while she lays down her book with affected indifference, or momentary shame.” (page 32).

Haven’t we all been there !! And more …

“ liveliest effusions of wit and humour are conveyed to the world in the best chosen language”. (page 32)

The aspect of the Romantic picturesque is also found in this novel – “The whole building enclosed a court; and two sides of the quadrangle, rich in Gothic ornaments, stood forward for admiration.” (page 154). You have the foreground and the background and features in between -- just like a painting.

Austen also enjoyed poking fun at the General allowing him to speculate on further developments of the estate just because it was fashionable to do so, and trying to keep up with others he thinks are of the same status.

A great read.

Wednesday, 27 May 2015

Peter Carey's Amnesia

Peter Carey is one of those writers readers rarely agree on. That's certainly been the case with our group in the past, and nothing changed this month when we discussed Carey's latest novel Amnesia. Consequently, the discussion was lively. Most people had finished or nearly finished it, but a couple gave up, finding it not to their liking. One found she was fighting her twenty-something son to read it - he kept picking it up when she wanted to read it. He didn't think his mum's group read books "like this"!

What we liked

Most, even those who didn't finish it, liked something. For some the beginning was engaging but they got tired of the "1970s political stuff". Others, particularly those who grew up in Melbourne, really enjoyed the middle part telling the story of the family - Sando, Celine and Gaby - and their lives in artsy Carlton and working class Coburg.

Another commented on Peter Carey's writing and his wonderful sentences, such as the description of the protagonist making a toilet for himself in the bush:
No-one saw him. No-one knew his aching knees. He was Felix Moore and he was aware of his position in his country's history and thus saw himself from a slightly elevated perspective, deriving some dour satisfaction from his similarity to Dürer's portrait of the hermit Saint Jerome.

Some enjoyed the humour, such as the story of Celine's grandmother, who, during World War 2, offered to entertain American soldiers, "except no Jews". She's sent a black GI. She tells him there must be a mistake, and he politely replies, "we are sorry to have inconvenienced you ... but it wasn't a mistake. Our Captain Cohen, he don't make no mistakes". Loved it!

Another enjoyed the satire, and particularly liked the second part of the novel. And one said that her husband thought it was a ripping yarn. (Never let it be said we don't involve men in our group!)

What we didn't like so much

For some the story was just a little too over-the-top and hard to follow. There was too much going on, and some of it, such as the computer-worm-and-hacking thread didn't fully hang together. A few felt that perhaps the story needed to be read in longer stints than last thing at night before bed!

One was a little irritated by the language at the beginning. Why did the character say "m'lud" in court rather than the more common Australian "your honour".  She also felt there were some anachronisms, such as the use of WTF. (However, later research revealed that WTF was first used on the Internet in 1985, which makes Carey's use okay.)

One felt the characters weren't easy to visualise.

We wondered whether Carey tried to satirise too many "things". And we all found Woody Townes a little mystifying. One described him as "shape-shifting". We knew he was an old university friend of the main protagonists, but who was he really and why was he doing what he was doing? Without spoiling too much, it was generally felt that he deserved what he got at the end!

Other questions and comments

This was a big, somewhat rambling book, and so our discussion was big and rambling too! One reader said it reminded her a little of Tim Winton's Eyrie which we read last year, because it too was about a journalist who got himself into trouble.

Given the political nature of the novel, a couple found themselves wondering whether characters in the book were meant to represent specific people. For example, the main character, leftie journalist Felix Moore. Was he supposed to be Mungo McCallum, or Bob Ellis, or even John Pilger? Others weren't sure, and one felt that Peter Carey who, like his character was born in Bacchus Marsh, may, at times, have been sending himself up. She quoted a sentence on the second last page:
For the crime of expressing pleasure that my book would be available to future generations, I was judged not only immoral but vain and preening ...
Why did smells and birds feature so much in the novel?

So what was it about?

We didn't come to a complete resolution on this, but we came up with several ideas:
  • how the young radicals of the 1960s/1970s brought up their own children and the ways in which they "sold out"
  • that modern activists now work with hacking and computer worms/viruses whereas their parents marched and leafletted, lobbied, etc.
  • cybersecurity, perhaps inspired by Julian Assange and Edward Snowdon
  • independence and/or interference in journalism, how "true" it is (or is not), pernicious "editing"
  • the importance of maintaining the rage, of not forgetting (hence the title "amnesia") what's happened in the past, of the need to be aware of the ways in which the USA has not been Australia's friend.
Not bad for a discussion which started out with more of us not liking the book than liking it.