Monthly Archives: March 2026

I hear with my little ear: Podcasts 24-28 February 2026

Journey Through Time Episode 66 The Spanish Civil War: Guernica, Picasso and the Nazis (Episode 5) As well as a laboratory for totalitarianism, the Spanish Civil War also acted as a proving ground for German military equipment. This was particularly true of the three-hour aerial bombing of the market town of Guernica, carpet bombing at first, followed by incendiary bombing, then strafing the citizens as they ran away – a new form of war that was intended to break the morale of the citizens. The Italians, on the other hand, used Spain as a way of showing their massed manpower to project strength. The Republicans sorely needed a victory, which they gained at Brunete and Teruel with huge casualties, but then they gave up the advantage almost immediately. By this time Stalin’s support of the International Brigade was declining, and Republican observers were beginning to warn of the dangers of Germany and tried to raise funds to bolster the Republican side. The Battle of Ebro was the longest one of the war and again, after initial success by the Republicans, it got bogged down and culminated in four months of futility. In 1938 the International Brigades were ordered out, in the hope that Germany and Italy would withdraw- a rather mad, forlorn hope.

The Book Club I’ve heard the Goalhanger The Book Club advertised on other Goalhanger production (e.g. The Rest is History, The Rest in Politics) but I can’t find it on Podbean. It is hosted by historian and author Dominic Sandbrook and his producer on The Rest Is History, Tabitha Syrett. The first episode is Wuthering Heights: Passion, Violence and Revenge in the Moors. They hadn’t seen the movie at that stage, so they stuck to the book. They point out the nested narrators: the new tenant Mr Lockwood interrogates Nelly, who had worked at Wuthering Heights thirty years earlier, and she is not necessarily a reliable narrator. Despite the visual imagery of the moors, much of the action takes place indoors. It was already historical when it was written, and violence permeates the whole book. The book has doubling throughout, and the repetition of names from one generation to another is very confusing. They give a score at the end. Dominic gives it 7/10 and Tabitha gives it 7.5/10.

Short History Of… I’m interested when an American or British podcast deigns to tackle an Australian topic. The Australian Gold Rush starts with Rev Clarke’s discovery of gold in Australia in 1841 and 1844, and Governor Gipps’ suppression of the news because as a convict society, they feared that ‘we shall all have our throats cut’. However in 1849, after the California gold rush and the cessation of transportation in most states, Gipps changed his mind and instituted an incentive scheme where 10,000 pounds would be awarded for the first discovery. Edward Hargreaves, along with his guide, John Lister, and the two Tom brothers found gold at Lewis Ponds Creek, but Edward Hargreaves took all the glory (and the money). Hargreaves was made a Crown Land Commissioner, and the prerogative of renaming the location which he called the Ophir goldfields. The episode has a lot of emphasis on the effect of the gold rush on First Nations people with the ruination of the environment and the introduction of disease (I think that the diseases had been long introduced before that). Emphasis is also placed on the Native Police as the first law enforcers on the gold fields, something I didn’t know. It then deals with the Gold Rushes in what became Victoria, and the later small gold rushes in the other states.

Witness History The Storming of Spain’s Parliament I don’t know whether it was because the attempted coup occurred on 23 February 1981or whether it was prompted by the death Putsch leader Antonio Tejero hours after Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez declassified files detailing the seizure of parliament in Madrid. It was the second attempt at a putsch by the civil guard, and 350 members of Parliament were held captive for 18 hours. Eventually King Juan Carlos talked them down, and condemned the coup (although since then there have been questions over when the King was himself involved). It was a vivid demonstration of the fragility of Spain’s democracy which was at that stage only six years old, and it coincided with a change of democratically elected government- obviously a dangerous time!

‘Broken Heart: A True History of the Voice Referendum’ by Shireen Morris

2024, 222 plus notes

I was crushed by the defeat of the Voice referendum, appalled that such a simple request would be rebuffed by so many people through fear and -although no one wanted to own it – racism. No wonder First Peoples kept silent immediately afterwards, because the implications were just too awful. I can’t imagine how the people who had been the ‘face’ of the Yes case felt. Broken Heart by Shireen Morris tells us.

Shireen Morris starts off by explaining her own position: neither Indigenous nor white. She is of Indian Fijian ancestry, the daughter of parents who migrated to Australia in the 1970s. This placed her in an ambiguous position. It was a political reality that the Indigenous 3% minority would need supporters and the advocates from the 97% for the referendum to pass, and somehow the white constitutional lawyers and advisers, seemed revered and respected. But as a non-white ally, she was often accused of being ‘not blak’.

She is a constitutional lawyer, whose primary focus under the mentorship of Noel Pearson and the Cape York Institute over the previous 12 years had been Indigenous constitutional recognition. Now, I’m no great fan of Noel Pearson, I must admit. I find his Old Testament Prophet, hectoring tone abrasive, and his alignment with right wing politicians off-putting. However, in relation to referenda (referendums?) they will only pass with bipartisanship, and the referendum often has to be introduced by the party less ideologically likely to do so. For example, the much-vaunted 1967 referendum was introduced and carried by the Liberal Party, and the neo-liberal economic reforms of the 1980s could only have been introduced by a Labor party. It would have been far better (albeit rather galling as far as Labor voters are concerned) if constitutional recognition had been introduced by the Liberal Party. But as Morris showed in her previous book Radical Heart, once the then-prime minister Malcolm Turnbull rejected the Voice proposal in October 2017, there was little hope of bipartisanship. There was only ever bipartisanship for an amorphous and wholly symbolic form of recognition, and that proposal was explicitly and firmly rejected by Indigenous people. There were four choices: 1. accept a symbolic statement which would be rejected by Aboriginal people 2. wait for bipartisanship- but when, if ever, would that happen? 3. Abandon all hope 4. Try to win it without Bipartisanship. They went for the fourth option.

Noel Pearson and the Cape York Institute promote the idea of the Radical Centre:

Finding the radical centre requires engagement across divides, in contrast to the entrenched ideological positions and point-scoring of ordinary partisan politics. It is not simply about splitting the difference between two opposing principles to reach a lowest-common denominator. Rather, it is about harnessing the ‘dialectical tension’ in enduring disagreements to uncover a creative and ambitious reform solution… A thesis is proposed, which attracts a counterargument, the antithesis. The radical centre endeavours to synthesise these contradictory insights into a richer truth or a more correct and consensus-building position….The radical centre thus eschews simplistic categories like left and right. Finding it is an empathetic endeavour, requiring us to see the humanity and intelligence in our opponents and the kernels of truth in their opinions. (p. 26)

This is where Pearson and Morris aimed their activities, but there’s not much evidence of it here. People changed sides, allies became opponents, people lied. I wonder if they still have faith in the Radical Centre.

The book starts with a timeline, starting in 2012 through to the referendum on 14 October, when 40% voted ‘yes’ and approximately 60% voted ‘no’. It wasn’t always that way: there was around 60% support at first until mid-2023. There were many meetings and several drafts, and the accusation by the Coalition that Albanese presented it as ‘my way or the highway’ was just not true. There were many, many compromises but never from the Coalition. In retrospect, Morris thinks that they gave ground too early, which left them no where to go.

In 2014 Peter Craven, Julian Leeser, Damian Freeman and constitutional lawyer Ann Twomey proposed a constitutionally guaranteed Indigenous body to provide ‘advice to the Parliament and the Executive Government on matters relating to’ Indigenous people. Yet, at various times, all except Twomey distanced themselves from this initial suggestion. Frank Brennan opposed it from the start- he only wanted symbolic constitutional recognition. Others flip-flopped: Turnbull said yes, but with equivocation and probably did more damage by giving people reasons to vote no when he voiced his misgivings. Peter Craven seemed to live up to his name. Julian Leeser was a co-creator and longtime supporter of the Voice but then he recommended gutting the advice-giving aspect of it. But at least he had the courage of his convictions to resign his position. Morris dubs him ‘a noble politician’ for standing up for what he believed in, notwithstanding negative career ramifications. Given Leeser’s equivocation, I think she’s giving him a free pass. Ex-ministers Cheney, Peter Baume and Ken Wyatt declared that they would vote ‘yes’, and finally Leeser switched to genuine advocacy, along with Andrew Gee and Brigid Archer.

As far as Albanese is concerned, Morris claims that he committed the first error when announcing the referendum at the Garma festival without include the title of the law that was being proposed (I reckon – gees, it was a music festival, not a court of law or parliament). The announcement was a surprise, and it came over as a Labor policy. Albanese did offer to negotiate with Peter Dutton, but Dutton didn’t take up the offer. Why didn’t Albanese let that be known? And should Albanese have cancelled when the support collapsed? She suggests that perhaps Albanese thought that it better that the country reject it, rather than that he break a promise. Should he have delayed? Well, it probably wouldn’t make any difference: it was too late, not too early.

I think that she gives Jacinta Nampijinpa Price and Lydia Thorpe a free pass. I know for myself, my support wavered at the thought that Indigenous people themselves might not want it. As it turns out, there was overwhelming Indigenous support.

The Yes side made mistakes too. They were advised that most people only engage with a referendum question 4-6 weeks before hand, and that powder should be kept dry. But it was a mistake: the NO campaign got a head start, especially over Christmas when the YES campaign just went to ground. They had no answer to the NO’s objection that everyone was equal and that the Voice would divide the country by race.

There’s a lot of if-onlys here: if only the Coalition had championed a Voice during their time in government; if only Turnbull had not rejected it in 2017;if only people like Tony Abbott, Christian Porter, Jeff Kennett, Alan Jones and many others had not switched from Yes to No; if only the constitutional drafters Greg Craven and Frank Brennan had not attacked the constitutional drafting; if only the compromises Indigenous people made had been saved for when people were paying more attention. If only the Labor government had explained the constitutional change better, and been able to encourage Coalition co-ownership. If only the YES campaign had started campaigning in earnest much earlier; and if only it had better strategies for countering disinformation. If only the media had not prosecuted false balance, and had critiqued mistruths. If only we had better politicians: a bit smarter on the left and much kinder on the right.

And most importantly:

If only we were better Australians, more generous with our love and less susceptible to fear. p. 219

I don’t know where to go with this, and I don’t think that Shireen Morris does either. Her mentor, Noel Pearson, said that he would step back from politics if the Referendum failed and he has kept to his word. What a depressing book.

My rating: 8/10

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

I hear with my little ear: Podcasts 16-23 February 2026

Short History Of…. The White House. Like many others, I’ve been transfixed with horror at Trump’s circle of adoration in the Oval Office and the increasing tide of gold tat that is encrusting the walls. But Trump is not the only President to make changes to the White House, with Theodore Roosevelt and William Taft constructing the East and West Wings and expanding the Oval Office, and Truman constructing the balcony. Under Jacqueline Kennedy, the White House was actually proclaimed a museum. The original Presidents Palace, based on Leinster House in Dublin, was built between 1792 and 1800, so the paint was barely dry by the time it was burnt and sacked by British troops in the War of 1812. It was a mixed- use building: both the President’s house and workplace. The White House originally had its own staff who worked only at the White House, but today Presidents tend to bring their own supposedly-loyal staff. George H. W. Bush was the most popular president amongst the traditional White House staff, supposedly because he was accustomed to having servants. Interesting… but it still doesn’t make me feel any better about Trump’s decorating taste. At least it can be taken down when he leaves, unlike the East Wing which no longer exists.

The Rest is History Episode 639 Revolution in Iran: Death in the Desert (Part 4) After mocking Jimmy Carter mercilessly over the previous three episodes, Dominic Sandbrook and Tom Holland finally express some sympathy and grudging admiration for President Carter in this episode. After the release of the black and female hostages, there were 52 male hostages left in Iran, and after showing restraint for months, Carter became more hawkish and finally in April 1980 he imposed sanctions on Iran. Cyrus Vance was still urging diplomacy, but that same month Brzezinski (in Vance’s absence) gained Carter’s approval of a military rescue of the hostages. It all sounds very Christian: the commanders assembled in a hangar before taking off, where they prayed, read about the story of David and Goliath and sang ‘God Bless America’. (Sheesh). It was a disaster: there was a dust storm, they encountered civilian pilgrims, and the helicopters malfunctioned, leading them to pile into a smaller number of helicopters. The attempt was aborted. By now, the 1980 Presidential election was afoot, and Iran held out until Reagan’s inauguration, despite and to spite Carter’s obsession and hard work in trying to get the hostages home. And look where we are now, invading Iran again.

Journey Through Time Episode 65 The Spanish Civil War: Orwell V Stalin (ep. 4) The Republicans were not one united group. There were communists, supported by Russia on one side. On the other side were anarchists, who were not part of the International Brigade, who wanted revolution within Civil War. This is the side that Orwell chose, when he joined POUM (Workers Party of Marxist Unification). They began fighting against each other. The communists took over the Telephone Exchange, which was controlled by POUM, and after POUM was defeated, it was seen as the ‘enemy’ and ‘facists’ just as much as the Nationalists were. He was in real danger, and after he escaped he wrote ‘Homage to Catalonia’, which he had trouble getting published. Spain was by now a laboratory for Stalinist repression, as well as a laboratory for fascism.

‘Chai Time at Cinnamon Gardens’ by Shankari Chandran

2022, 360 p.

Did this really win the Miles Franklin Prize in 2023? What on earth else was on the shortlist?

The 2023 Miles Franklin Literary Award shortlist was:

  • Hopeless Kingdom by Kgsak Akec (my review here)
  • Limberlost by Robbie Arnott (my review here)
  • Cold Enough for Snow by Jessica Au
  • Chai Time at Cinnamon Gardens by Shankari Chandran
  • The Lovers by Tumna Kassab
  • Iris by Fiona Kelly McGregor

I’ve only read the first two of these, and it seems that I wasn’t particularly impressed with them either. Five of the authors were first-time nominees, and one was a debut author. It’s commendable to open it up to new talent, perhaps, but given that the Miles Franklin is still Australia’s premier literary prize, I don’t know that we were given six books that are going to last.

There’s nothing wrong with this book. It makes a perfectly good bookgroup book. It is packed full with issues: racism, domestic violence, PTSD, loyalty, colonialism, Tamil and Sri Lankan history. In fact, it’s probably too packed with issues. For an Australian readership, it introduces Tamil history and the violence in Sri Lanka that most of us have forgotten about (if we were ever very aware of it). It is even more relevant today than it was in 2023, with the rise of One Nation and March for Australia.

It is set in a nursing home, run by Anjali (Anji) who took it over from her mother Maya who relinquished it after her husband Zakhir left unexpectedly never to return. The narrative runs on two timelines: the present day and flashback.

The present day involves the marital strains between the home’s geriatrician Nikki,and her husband Gareth, a local councillor and hopeful political candidate, whose marriage is tense after the death of their toddler daughter Florence. Although Gareth doesn’t know it, his wife is having an affair with Ruben, a Sri Lankan worker at the home, who is clearly overqualified for the job but happy to take it. Thrashing about in his unhappiness, Gareth becomes caught up in a racist maelstrom, prompted by finding a statue of Captain Cook abandoned under the nursing home.

The flashbacks take us back to Sri Lanka (Ceylon) and the civil war between the Tamils through the terrorist group, the Tamil Tigers, and the Sinhalese army. But the flashbacks are handled awkwardly, and inserted clunkily into the text.

There’s just too much going on here. No doubt it will spark a good discussion at bookgroup next week, but I don’t think that it’s Miles Franklin material.

My rating: 7

Sourced from: Ladies Who Say Oooh Bookgroup

Movie: Jean Valjean

Jean Valjean comes over as the real good guy in the musical Les Mis but in this backstory, which actually appears in the original book, he’s no good guy. It’s 1815 and he has just been released from prison. Penniless, homeless and marked by his yellow convict passport, he is treated with suspicion by the villagers of Digne. He is taken in by Monseigneur Bienvenu, who lives with his sister and servant. He is a violent, frightening presence and he takes advantage of the opportunity to steal the silverware, only to escape punishment when the Monseigneur claims that he had given it to him.

This story was actually reprinted as ‘The Bishop’s Candlesticks’ in an anthology of children’s stories that my mother had before me and my husband said that he read it as part of a school reader when he was a kid. With its religious overtones and rather heavyhanded ethics, I don’t know that it would make it as children’s reading today (to say nothing of the language level). Although it’s an engaging exploration of forgiveness and redemption, which a child would benefit from, this is not a children’s film, with a fairly graphic depiction of imprisonment and menace.

My rating: 4/5

Seen because: it was a preview for the upcoming French Film Festival. It has English subtitles.