We feature each week Nicholas Reid's reviews and comments on new and recent books.
“DEAR NEIL ROBERTS” by Airini Beautrais
(Victoria University Press, $NZ25); “HOW TO BE DEAD IN A YEAR OF SNAKES” by
Chris Tse (Auckland University Press, $NZ 24:99); “DISCONTENT AND ITS
CIVILIZATIONS” by Mohsin Hamid (Hamish Hamilton / Penguin $NZ37)
Pardon
me, as somebody who prefers to give you full-length and detailed reviews, for
this week gathering together three books of quite different types for briefer
attention. Two of them are books of poetry. Coincidentally both have as their
starting point a specific event in New Zealand history. The third is a
collection of newspaper pieces.
*
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/70044/700441e4a81884d6995b4b0e8a05c3a91eb37914" alt=""
Dear Neil Roberts is
organised as a series of voices, presenting different views of the young man
and his self-immolation, as well as presenting autobiographical moments from
the poet’s own life. Some of it is bracingly ironic. The poem “Finding the Story”, for example, is about a
friend who played with the fashion-statement radical-chic aspect of anarchism
as in
“My friend made a flag
from a bin liner and some red fabric.
Went with a buddy through the streets,
got batoned, got in with the cool kids.”
The ‘first
person’ of many poems is clearly not the poet’s own voice. The poem “Press”
gives us what editorials of the day thought about Roberts. According to an
author’s note at the end, “By way of explanation” is made up entirely of
quotations from the detective who investigated Roberts’ death, and comes across
largely as an attempt to rationalise Roberts’ motives out of existence:
“Why people turn to that I don’t know,
but from experience I know that young people
sometimes can’t keep pace with the changes in society
and become very vulnerable to persuasion.”
In quite a
contrasting tone, the poem “Man” is a collage made up of quotations taken from
newspapers at the time, describing Neil Roberts and regretting or lamenting his
death rather than celebrating it as some sort of symbolic statement: “He was scared of growing old. / His
philosophy was that growing old was pointless.”
Oddly enough, I
found the most arresting poems to be “Finding the Dead” and “Time” about trying
to do archival research on Roberts’ death in the local library, and finding
that the old fads and advertisements in newspapers of the day revealed the gulf
between now and then.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/8f6d0/8f6d00ef0c06868d662b2145d64ed6174ec50bec" alt=""
I would LIKE
Roberts’ death to have as much significance as the poet wishes it had, when she
connects him to the great anarchist tradition in “A sad, flippant kind of nihilism”
(Kropotkin, Bakunin, Proudhon etc.) or when she regrets that he’s been written
out of the record in “History books”. But in the end I’m left with an image of
a 22-year-old kid who blew himself up; and I’m thinking his mind was no more
formed than a 22-year-old soldier dying in battle and probably dying as
pointlessly. And I am thinking the “propaganda of the act” (an anarchist phrase
Beautrais never uses) is as much a weapon of the Right as of the Left. Roberts’
self-immolation is the self-immolation of a suicide bomber.
Yet poems such
as “Machine”, “Death of a beast” and “Monster relic” remind us that the Wanganui
computer was primitive compared to today’s surveillance and storage of
information:
“UNIVAC stored data on ceramic discs,
in units the size of washing machines,
each with a 700 megabyte capacity.
Less than a thumb drive today. You could flush
that information down the toilet, now, squash
it with a small hammer.”
And it was the
prospect of today’s privacy-less electronic wasteland against which Roberts was
protesting. Perhaps he had a point.
Airini Beautrais
likes to write in carefully-organised three- or four-line stanzas. Her book,
unlike much current poetry, has the advantage of being clear in its meaning and
very accessible. I mean this as a compliment.
* * * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* *
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f3276/f32761d0d53d1c205f1ec09dc1253f0169729534" alt=""
One historical
point of departure for How to be Dead in
a Year of Snakes is the sinking of the SS Ventnor in 1902 off the Hokianga coast. It was carrying the remains
of 499 Chinese miners, being repatriated to China for burial. While most of the
cargo of corpses sank to the bottom of the sea with the ship, some drifted
ashore and were buried by local iwi: “The
departed cargo / thought doomed / to forgetful waters / instead finds its way /
to open shores / rescued by the people of the land.”
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/74c98/74c98999eeac2fec38c9c35bb54e4164d3be9777" alt=""
The sequence of
poems then focuses on the death of one Chinese man in New Zealand and how he is
(or is not) remembered. This was the Cantonese miner Joe Kum Yung, murdered in
the streets of Wellington in 1905 by Lionel Terry, a demented man obsessed with
“the Yellow Peril” and believing that he was striking a blow for the white
race. At least one purpose of How to be
Dead in a Year of Snakes is to give Joe Kum Yung an identity after decades
in which most New Zealanders who have heard of the case (including this
reviewer) think of him simply as “the old Chinese man” killed by the demented
Lionel Terry. Because Joe Kum Yung’s murder took place in the Year of the
Snake, Chris Tse takes some time in his imagery to reflect on snakes, note the
cunning nature of the snake in Terry, and connecting the image to the
slipperiness in the way we interpret history.
Of the way Joe
Kum Yung has been turned into a “case”, with his identity taken from him, Chris
Tse writes: “So there goes / a life story
reduced / to one gunshot / and there goes madness / in the form of public
service / and there wait / those graceless thieves / of light and sound /
slipping to a snake’s crawl / to rewrite his truths.”
Having spent one
section of his sequence discoursing on New Zealand’s restrictive anti-Chinese
immigration laws in the early 20th century, Chris Tse says of the New
Zealand-European community: “They claimed
good will / and mutual understanding / but they only know to keep / their hands
to themselves / such as they are entranced / by the man with the gun and his
echoes.”
Of the way the
murdered man has been subsumed into Lionel Terry’s act he writes: “Lionel’s legacy in the history books: / racist,
murderer. / But where is Joe? / Ah - / he’s with Lionel.”
While all that I
have reported here is indeed in How to be
Dead in a Year of Snakes, I would be misrepresenting this volume if I made
it appear so straightforwardly polemical. Chris Tse’s technique is highly
reflective, almost introverted, like a series of restrained soliloquies rather
than strident public verse. His poetry appears in irregular and fragmented
lines. Choruses speak of “we” when it is not always clear to whom “we” refers.
What I am saying is that this volume requires much concentration of the reader
and, despite the evident feelings of the poet, is both opaque and a demanding
read.
* *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* * *
* *
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/f7b0f/f7b0ffdc639f89b6b05990df0e4695a060468783" alt=""
Mohsin Hamid is
the youngish (43-years-old) Pakistan-born, American-educated,
London-and-Lahore-resident novelist who has three novels behind him, all of
which were bestsellers – Moth Smoke, The Reluctant Fundamentalist and How to Get Filthy Rich in Rising Asia. I
was attracted to Discontent and its
Civilizations by its rather smartarse title. (Yes. I know it’s a parody of
Freud. No letters please.) This suggested something tart and witty. The book
has, as Hamid’s introduction says, been “shaped” by the author from fifteen
years worth of his “pieces” in the New
York Times, the New Statesman,
the Independent and elsewhere, and it
bears the subtitle Dispatches from
Lahore, New York, London.
So far, so good.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c9cbc/c9cbcbbe83c62be69b1bfd758e725a91cd590764" alt=""
So in reading Discontent and its Civilizations, I
found myself registering Hamid’s opinions on a number of issues and then noting
simply whether I agreed or disagreed with him. My score-card goes thus:
Hamid: Three autobiographical pieces about losing the use of Urdu until
he returned to Pakistan from the States, and discovering a counter-culture in
Lahore and dancing.
Me: Interesting, but too brief to say much.
Hamid: Three more autobiographical pieces about the way airport passport
control in the West look at him askew because he is dark-skinned and Muslim; about
his parents’ fears as terror reaches Lahore; about how the English press is
less self-censored than the American press.
Me: You have my sympathy.
Hamid: And three more autobiographical pieces about meeting a real
Islamic nutter on the London underground. (Me: Ouch!). And becoming a
father. (Me: Take it from a father… this is gooey cliché.). And deciding
to move with wife and kid back to Pakistan. (Me: Okay).
Hamid: Three pieces about life in Pakistan now – a crowd watches the
movie Avatar and relates it to
American imperialism. Despite upheavals, parts of Pakistan are quiet and
thriving. Despite threats to women and religious minorities, there is a growing
cohort of open-minded and well-educated Pakistani university students.
Me: Thanks. This is encouraging journalism.
Hamid: Discusses his favourite novel, Antonio Tabucchi’s Sostiene Pereira.
Me: Fair enough.
Hamid: Discusses his own novel The
Reluctant Fundamentalist.
Me: Self-advertisement, mate.
Hamid: He likes using the second person in narrative; he likes reading Paris Review interviews; he wonders about
e-books.
Me: Yawn! These pieces are too short to say much of interest.
Hamid: He wants us to believe TV mini-series are the equivalent of the
great 19th century novels.
Me: Bullshit!
And so at last,
now over halfway through the volume, we get to meatier pieces in the sections
headed “Politics”. Longest piece in the book is the 22 pages of “Why Drones
Don’t Help”. Second longest piece in the book is the 14 pages of “Why They Get
Pakistan Wrong”. Both are withering critiques of US foreign policy as it relates
to Pakistan, especially in the way US “aid” props up a military elite,
indiscriminately lashes out at the general population and ignores the ethnic,
religious and political diversity of the country. Wisest words in the book are
the five pages of the concluding article “Islam is not a Monolith”, in which
Hamid begs Westerners not to believe stereotypes about over one billion people.
Okay. As I said
near the beginning of this notice, I do not disagree with WHAT Hamid is saying,
which is sensible and occasionally informative stuff. I’m just saying that the
brevity of most pieces makes them read as glib newspaper pieces and they do not
make up a book of matured wisdom.
No comments:
Post a Comment