A (Warning) Blast From The Past

Those of you planning Battle of Bosworth Field Memorial wakes today – hard to believe I know, but it’s 518 years since Richard III was defeated by Henry Tudor at Bosworth Field, time flies etc – will be gratified by this In Memoriam notice from todays SMH:

PLANTAGENET, Richard. Died
at Bosworth, August 22, 1485. Loyaulte me lie.

Those of you who might naively imagine that vitriolic historical disputation is a transient phenomenon of Australian academe should think again. The Richard III Society remains firmly convinced that Richard III was foully traduced by revisionists like William Shakespeare (if indeed such a person actually wrote the plays attributed to him) and other Tudor dynasty hagiographers. They claim he was a fine man – almost Bradmanesque in fact – though he never played cricket as far as we know: of course, Henry Tudor was a low, traitorous knave, etc.

Let’s perhaps be grateful that Australian historians have turned their gaze southward…….

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
7 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ken Parish
Ken Parish
2022 years ago

Excellent lateral thinking Geoff. And thanks for holding the fort. My home PC is currently unuseable, and my office one is also having serious problems, that may or may not be fixed today. So posting of any sort from me is a tad chancy for the moment.

wen
wen
2022 years ago

During Peter Carey’s National Press Club speech this week, a journo suggested that there was a danger that Carey’s representation of the past (Carey’s Ned Kelly, his McCorkle/Malley) might come to be seen as the ‘true’ story by future Australians.

We need to outlaw historical fiction before it’s too late.

Geoff Honnor
Geoff Honnor
2022 years ago

It’s too late wen. Catherine Cookson lives!

woodsy
woodsy
2022 years ago

Jeez you’re a shitstirrer Geoff! You want to start Chris and Norman off again ? Apart from Catherine Cookson, the historical novel or, as I prefer to call it, the ‘faction’ genre will always be a popular way of writing about issues that would bring on defamation litigation if they were to be presented as history.

I attended a workshop the other day about writing fiction based on fact and the subject of Kennealy’s last book, can’t remember the title, it’s about asylum seekers, was discussed. It seems that a journo that cultivated a refugee in one of the camps, was used as a thinly disguised character in the book. The journo, a female who writes for the SMH if I remember correctly (her name escapes me also; this CRAFT disease is crippling at times), contacted Kennealy and told him about the grief he caused and was told by the author that, when writing, he doesn’t give any consideration to the ramifications of identifying the characters in his books. I suspect the same could be said of Peter Carey, the work is everything, he doesn’t care about the factual correctness.

In any case, after Jack Maggs and the Kelly books, I doubt that Australian readers will bother too much with Carey in future. It seems to me the multiple Bookers have gone to his head and he will do anything the publisher demands to continue the royalties flowing in.

Geoff Honnor
Geoff Honnor
2022 years ago

No I’m not Wayne – it’s more like a sanctimonious homily than a shitstir. Anyway, Chris is more focussed on historical matters Australian. Norman? Jeez! Come to think of it, Norman could have been there!

mark
2022 years ago

JE Macdonnel (the Aussie WWII pulp author) once wrote a semi-fictional account of the sinking of the Bismarck. Looking back (though I was quite the fan of his growing up), it’s probably the only decent thing he ever set to print.

wen
wen
2022 years ago

Woodsy – it was Caroline Baum & she’s written about the incident here:

http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/07/19/1058035185380.html