Clendinnen's writing is so strikingly clear and her interest in the ethnographic, as well as the historic, engages with the confusions and the fog of life as it is lived. This follows in the vein of Greg Dening's account of the mutiny - and aftermath - on the Bounty in Mr Bligh's Bad Language: Passion, Power and Theatre on the Bounty (1992). Clendinnen writes in her 'Introduction' (p.3):
Historians' main occupational hazard is being culture-insensitive, anthropologists' is insensitivity to temporal change. Both can be insensitive to the reciprocating dynamic between action and context. Together, however, they are formidable, and in my view offer the best chance of explaining what we humans do in any particular circumstance, and why we do it.I'll post a few more choice quotes over the coming week ...
1 comment:
Hi Andrew, just caught up with this. I think Clendinnen's book is far more rewarding than Grenville's, though I have a few quibbles with it as well. The sources we have for that period of first contact are so rich and intriguing, I'm not sure why we need a novelist to add in fictional bits. Clendinnen is so good at imaginative history - but I guess Grenville was able to bring the issues to a wider audience.
And you probably know that Clendinnen was at the same uni in Melbourne as Dening and also Rhys Isaac for quite a long time. The three of them became known world wide as trail-blazers in enthnographic history (and were collectively dubbed 'the melbourne school').
If you're enjoying that kind of stuff, why not cut to the chase and actually read Watkin Tench? His journal makes a terrific read. Grenville's new book the Lieutenant is also well worth reading.
Post a Comment