jump to navigation

Reading war’s unsung songs September 10, 2023

Posted by dolorosa12 in books, films, review reprint, reviews.
Tags: , , ,
add a comment

This post is part of a series of articles that I previously published in various Australian newspapers when I was working as a reviewer between 2001 and 2012. The vast majority of these do not exist in digital format, and I’ve decided to reprint them here for digital preservation. Much of what is said in these republished reviews does not represent my current thinking, but rather my understanding at the time of writing and original publication. The titles of the posts are the titles that were given to the articles by subeditors upon publication.

Summer in Australia is usually a lazy time, spent lounging at the beach or pool wiht some light-weight holiday reading, having turned the brain off after a long year of work or study. However, this summer, for me at least, has been, unintentionally, the summer of World War I. Completely coincidentally I chose to spent January transcribing my great-grandfather’s diary, which he kept as a young soldier in France between 1916 and 1918. This diary is a mixture of the banal — observations on the weather, lists of towns on his journey to the front — and the devastating. While it’s a sometimes heartbreaking account (at one point he says, ‘Lest I forget if by God’s Grace I return home, War is Hell, terrible. Lord forgive us.’) it is difficult to get a complete sense of what World War I was like from his words alone. As the opening scenes from the World War II movie Saving Private Ryan show, the special effects now available allow us to experience everything but the smell of total war with a sense of reality beyond the written word.

This singular ability of film to enable us to more closely experience the horrors of war is demonstrated again in the current French film A Very Long Engagement, which draws the viewer into the almost unspeakable existence of soldiers in the muddy trenches during World War I. In watching this film, where a beautiful love story jostles for position with scenes of the most appalling death and destruction, I was reminded of Sebastian Faulk’s novel, Birdsong, which makes use of the same juxtaposition. This book, like the movie, attempts to deal with the same aspect of World War I — the indescribable nature of trench warfare, and traumatic effect it had on the lives of the mostly young men who fought. A Very Long Engagement relies on the redemptive power of love to give the story a happy ending; but this is not enough for Faulks, and so Birdsong is a story about the attempt to put words to events which defy description. It’s a meditation on the challenge of describing the indescribable.

The soldiers in Birdsong live in a hell far worse than that of the trenches: many of them, miners and underground train workers in previous lifetimes, spend their days digging tunnels deep within the earth, stoic in the knowledge that their German counterparts could be in similar tunnels just around the corner. It is as if these men are buried before they are even dead, living in a subterranean world like a pack of medieval devils.

However, the real devils of Faulks’s novel are the politicians and generals, safely removed from these nightmares, in French villas or in England, sending their men to suffer for what Faulks clearly believes is no reason. Their ignorance is breathtaking — one officer talks of his fondness for the bayonet as a weapon, failing to recognise that new military technology means that soldiers never get close enough to their enemy to use it. This incredible naivete highlights the strangeness of World War I. As Faulks points out, the soldiers were trained in the old style of warfare — drilling, cavalry charge and so on — but used new, much more destructive weaponry. As a result, these bewildered boys, many as young as 17 or 18, blundered into a nightmare, physically capable of fighting but not mentally able to deal with the massacres, or the degradation of trench life.

Faulks’s major concern is with innocence corrupted, with humanity depraved. According to his philosophy, it was not only the terrifying fighting, but also the squalor, filth and disease of trench life which dehumanised the young soldiers. Early on in the book, its central character, Stephen Wraysford, professes a horror of birds and their ‘prehistoric cruelty.’ Faulks clearly intends a connection between avian behaviour and human barbarity during World War I. Faulks’s characters literally wallow in the mud, their clothes crawling with lice.

He makes the point that soldiers (like my great-grandfather) who suffered the singular ghastliness of life in the trenches were unable ever fully to share it with those who hadn’t been there. Stephen Wraysford shuts himself up inside an emotionless vacuum, surviving on blind hatred of the Germans. Another character longs for death because he feels unable to return home and carry on a loving relationship with his wife. He feels closer to the other men in the trenches, strangers before the war, than his family back in London. A third soldier returns home on leave, and becomes filled with anger at his family’s inability to understand his suffering. There is a sense that words are inadequate, description futile, that eloquence died on the fields of Flanders. Birdsong is ultimately life-affirming, but in a cathartic sense: the novel is tragic, rather than depressing.

And yet Faulks remains uncertain right up to the end of his book. In the last sentence, he returns to birds, to the crow and its ‘ambiguous call.’ His writing makes his theme paradoxical — his characters speak eloquently of their inability to describe their experiences. Faulks is too modest — he has found the words to describe the indescribable: ‘No child or future generation will ever know what this was like. They will never understand. When it is over we will go quietly among the living and we will not tell them. We will talk and sleep and go about our business like human beings. We will seal what we have seen in the silence of our hearts, and no words will reach us.’

This article first appeared in the 30 January, 2005 issue of The Canberra Times.

If you link me that much you will stick around March 6, 2015

Posted by dolorosa12 in books, films, linkpost, short stories, television.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
add a comment

I have so many links for you this week! My Twitter feed has been very generous in sharing its fabulous internet finds, and I’ve gathered the best of them to post here.

First up, have a couple of short stories. ‘Translatio Corporis’ by Kat Howard and ‘The Monkey House’ by Tade Thompson absolutely rocked my world. They’re published in Uncanny Magazine and Omenana respectively.

I went on a massive Twitter rant about failures of imagination in historical fantasy novels set in medieval Britain and Ireland, so I found this post on ‘Celtic fantasy’ by Liz Bourke to be very welcome and timely.

Likewise this post by Kate Elliott on writing women characters touched on a lot of things that matter to me in storytelling.

Joanne Harris makes some good points about the economics of literary festivals.

This post by Renay is very perceptive on self-rejection, anthology-curation and the difficulties in amplifying the voices of others.

I found the conversation taking place at the #WritingNewZA hashtag on South African literature really interesting.

Tricia Sullivan writes about the pitfalls of being a mother who writes. (I would say that this potentially applies to primary caregivers of any gender, but there are particularly gendered elements of the problems she’s outlining that lead me to think her emphasis on mothers specifically is correct in this instance.)

Here is a Storify of tweets by Aliette de Bodard about the fallacy of devoting your entire life to writing.

I grew up on Sara Douglass’s books, and while they’re far from perfect, she herself was a really important figure in the history of fantasy literature in Australia. Here, Australian fantasy author Fiona McIntosh remembers her.

I’ve found Abigail Nussbaum’s recent Hugo recommendation posts useful. Here’s the short fiction one, and here’s the one on publishing and fan categories.

I want to see this film!

I’m thoroughly enjoying watching Ana discover the Dark Is Rising sequence over at The Book Smugglers.

This is a good summation of what made Parks and Recreation so great, over The Mary Sue.

Finally, have an Old English text about the wonders of books.

The sun is shining and the sky is clear here in Cambridge. It looks like this weekend is going to be excellent for me, and I hope it is the same for you.

Stepping into the same river twice June 16, 2013

Posted by dolorosa12 in books, childhood, films, memories, meta, television.
Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
12 comments

I am 28 years old. I have spent most of my adult life as a student. I only moved out of home five years ago, and I only moved out of sharehouses and student accommodation nine months ago. I have a long-term partner, but no children. All this is relevant.

I was thinking about stories, and how important age and circumstances are in determining meaning and how you react to them. There are some stories I can come back to time and time again, and get different things out of them every time. Buffy the Vampire Slayer is like that for me. I’ve been watching and rewatching it since I was twelve years old, and it means something different every single time. Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles is another story like that for me. Each time I rewatch it, I feel I’ve barely scratched its surface. It reveals its secrets so slowly. I’m somewhat afraid to reread His Dark Materials in case it stops being this kind of story to me. It meant so much to me, it gave so much to me that for it to stop meaning and giving would be unbearable.

There are other stories which I think gain something from being reread with adult eyes. The young-adult literature of Victor Kelleher falls into this category. I first read his work as an eleven-year-old, and continued revisiting it throughout my teenage years, but the true horror and weight of what he was saying doesn’t really hit home until you’ve reached adulthood and had some of your illusions shattered. There are other stories which mattered as much to me as Kelleher’s when I was a child and a teenager – the works of Gillian Rubinstein, Catherine Jinks’ Pagan Chronicles and John Marsden’s Tomorrow series – but for which rereading provokes only nostalgia and the restored memory of what it felt like to be fifteen, and burning with outrage, passionately emoting and dreaming fervently. The stories remain wonderful, but they offer me no new truths in adulthood, only a window into the child I used to be. This is of value, of course, but it’s not the same thing. The vast majority of works aimed at children and teenagers that I’ve enjoyed and read or watched in adulthood evoke much the same feelings.

I grew up watching the films of the Marx Brothers (I first watched Duck Soup in a cinema when I was three years old), and I always found them hilarious. What I didn’t notice until I was well into adulthood was the deep undercurrent of sadness and alienation running through them, and the tendency for Groucho, Chico and Harpo to make self-deprecating jokes, to make themselves figures of fun, to paint themselves as mercenary, petty criminals in order to get in first before someone else said the same things. There’s a defensiveness to all their quips, a brittle, knowing edge to all their humour that you only see when you’re older, and when you know more about the history of immigration to the US.

And then there are the texts for which meaning and enjoyment is, I think, contextual. I read Wuthering Heights as a fourteen-year-old and thought it was a tragic love story. I read it again at twenty-two, and thought it was a horror story, a Greek myth about gods and mortals. At eighteen, when I went through a phase of reading Russian literature in translation, Tolstoy moved me to rapturous tears, while Dostoevsky appalled and repelled me. Isobelle Carmody’s works can only truly be appreciated by teenagers. To an adult, they are dangerously naïve and lack any kind of nuance. At 28, my favourite book of Jane Austen’s is Persuasion, while at sixteen I would have said Pride and Prejudice. When I was fourteen, people told me I would cry my eyes out over the ending of Casablanca, but I was unmoved. My reaction? I hated Rick, swooned over Victor Laszlo (I was going through a bit of a thing for revolutionaries and resistance fighters) and couldn’t see what the fuss was about. If I am earnest now, I was a million times worse then. But I suspect, were I to watch the film again, my reaction might be very different. At fourteen, I read The Mill on the Floss and felt nothing. At twenty, I read Daniel Deronda and felt profoundly moved.

I remember my mother telling me, when I was a passionate armchair revolutionary in high school, that as an adult I would find repellent the Holocaust stories, tales about the Troubles in Northern Ireland and the Middle East conflict that I pored over as a teenager. I didn’t believe her, but she was right. I don’t want to look any more. I used to love uncompromising rebels, and now I prefer diplomats and passive resistance.

I don’t think all of this is down to age, in and of itself. Taste plays a role, as does environment, and the ethos of the age in which you grew up and which informed your tastes. My mother, for example, loves Charles Dickens and finds Zadie Smith contrived and emotionless. I find Dickens cloyingly sentimental, emotionally manipulative and hypocritical, while Zadie Smith evokes feelings of awe and floods of tears in me. I don’t think baby boomers will uniformly share her views, no more than I think Gen Y people will uniformly share mine, but I suspect our respective generations may have affected our tastes to some extent. (That said, my father loves Zadie Smith and was, indeed, the one to introduce me to her work.)

For as long as I can remember, my favourite Shakespeare play has been The Tempest. I suspect I see it with different eyes than the first time I encountered it as a twelve-year-old watching the Bell Shakespeare Company’s production. And I suspect it will mean something very different when I am an old woman. My point in all of this is that although it is possible to step in the same river twice, it is not possible to do so for every river. Some stories are static, and can mean only one thing at one particular age in one particular place. And some others are always changing, and go on and on forever.

Design a site like this with WordPress.com
Get started