Category Archives: Book Reviews 2026

‘London Falling’ by Patrick Radden Keefe

2026, 320 p. & notes

It seems that every TV report of a shooting or murder in a suburban area has a neighbour standing on the nature strip, shaking their head and saying “But it’s such a quiet area. Nothing like this ever happens here” (although clearly, it has.). That’s very much the feeling that Matthew and Rachelle Brettler felt when their 19 year old son’s body was found in the mudflats of the Thames, overlooked by a luxury high-rise apartment building. The CCTV footage of his last night showed him on the balcony moving from one end to the other, before launching off from the middle, catching his hip on the embankment wall on the way down. Was it suicide or a failed attempt to jump out and reach the water because he was in fear of his life? And what was he doing in that apartment anyway?

All of this was bewildering to his parents, both the children of Holocaust survivors, who lived a middle-class existence in an apartment in Maida Vale. His mother was a journalist and his father was a financial services manager. Zac had been their second son, who had felt second-rate when he failed to get into University College School, the academic private school that his older brother Joe attended. Instead, he attended Mill Hill School, a private school with less exacting academic standards where he mixed with the scions of wealthy expatriates, especially those of post-Soviet Russia and the Middle East. Here he was free to reinvent himself, lying about his parents’ jobs and covering his chest with fake Russian mafia tattoos. After school, he boasted of Kazakh and Nigerian business contacts, began wearing a sharp suit and became involved in cryptocurrency and other dubious business enterprises. He reinvented Zac Brettler as “Zac Ismailov”, affected a slight Russian accent,and concocted a backstory of a immense wealth from his Russian oligarch father who was looking for investment opportunities. He was drawn into the social circle of Akbar Shamji, an older, wealthy businessman whose wife was a fashion designer, and through him to Verinder Sharma, an underworld enforcer known also as Indian Dave. It was at Sharma’s apartment that he met his death, although both Sharma and Shamji denied involvement in his so-called ‘suicide’.

No-one is who they say they are here- except Matthew and Rachelle, who are bewildered by this whole other world so separate from the middle-class lives that they lived. People have multiple names, multiple identities. Sharma had several names, and disappeared regularly to Europe when things got too ‘hot’ in London. Akbar Shamji’s father had insinuated himself into the circle surrounding Margaret Thatcher purporting to be a wealthy oligarch, but his fortune was built on unsecured loans. But, as the Brettlers learn, invented lives and secrets are part of many families. Rachelle’s own father, a much-loved Rabbi, had lied about attending Cambridge University and fathered a secret child with a woman in his congregation.

I’ve only just recently finished watching the Netflix series of ‘Say Nothing’, based on Keefe’s book of the same name about the IRA. He brings his same journalistic and investigative skills to this book as well, drawing on interviews predominantly with Rachelle and Matthew Brettler over a two-year period. There are other interviews as well, both on and off the record, and he draws on the work of other journalists and investigators have been investigating Zac’s death and international crime in London .

This is a family story, of parents struggling to find out what happened to their son, who had become embroiled in a fantasy life in a milieu completely foreign to them. But it’s also the story of London, and its slide into its own mudflats of sleaze and oligarchical money, abetted by successive governments which wanted to attract and capture the easy money from disreputable men from disreputable regimes. Reading of the easy acquiescence of police and coroners in attributing highly suspicious deaths as suicides, especially among people with Russian connections, suggests that the corruption has spread throughout police and political realms, which have their own reasons for moving into the ‘Grey Zone’ of multinational crime and politics. It’s this juxtaposition of the familial and intimate everyday life of a middle-class family, and the monied ruthlessness of international crime and corruption that gives this book its power.

My rating: 9/10

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

Read because: I was impressed with the ‘Say Nothing’ series on Netflix.

‘The Magician’ by Colm Tóibín

2024, 448 p.

When I saw the Book Group selection for this month, I was a bit disappointed because I thought that I had read it before. However, I had confused Tóibín’s The Master (about Henry James) with The Magician, although looking at my pre-blog Reading Journal for The Master, my comments for the two book could be interchangeable.

Both of these books by Tóibín deal with a writer and his repressed/hinted at homosexuality in ‘fictionalized biography’ form. The Magician is a fictionalized biography of Thomas Mann, who was much spoken-of in my undergraduate English studies back in the 1970s but the only work of his that I have read is Death in Venice. I am a bit uneasy about fictionalized biography- which bits are fiction? which bits are biography?- and so I decided to read the Wikipedia entry for him before embarking on the book, and I’m glad that I did. I would have been able to follow it without any pre-reading, but I felt on more secure ground while reading it.

The book starts in Lübeck in 1891, when Thomas is a schoolboy in a wealthy provincial family. His father was a senator and Protestant businessman who had, rather out of character, married the impetuous Julia da Silva-Bruhns from Brazil. Thomas was one of five children, with his older brother Heinrich, sisters Lula and Carla and younger brother Viktor. When his father died, the will required the sale of the family firm, and Thomas’ mother and children moved to Munich. Thomas was sent to be an office clerk at a Fire Insurance Company even though, like his older brother Heinrich, he had aspirations to be a writer. Always attracted to young men, he married Katia Pringsheim in 1905, who came from a wealthy, secular Jewish industrialist family. They had six children, but she was always aware of his homosexual yearnings, and even facilitated them. His two eldest children Erika and Klaus were also homosexual and thoroughly embroiled in the Weimar Republic nightclub and intellectual scene. Another son came out later in life. His first novel Buddenbrooks was published in 1901, a thinly disguised history of his own family, and it launched his literary career which culminated in the Nobel Prize for Literature in 1929. It was the money from his publications, especially the American dollars from the translations of his work, which shielded him from the economic madness of Weimar Germany and enabled him to build several houses and live a comfortable lifestyle. His books, while not autobiographical, reflected his own interests: the decline of the old Hanseatic bourgeoisie, the attraction between an older man and young boys, music, and a conservative, anti-modernist politics that championed German intellectual literature.

Although there is much about his writing (very little of which I have read), what interested me particularly, in today’s political world, was the gradual encroachment of Nazism, which Thomas at first discounted as an aberration that would pass. However, after being encouraged to go to Switzerland as the political climate hardened:

Thomas began to lose hope that the regime might fail in Germany. The Nazis, he realized, were not like the poets of the Munich Revolution. They were street fighters who had taken power without losing their sway over the streets. They managed to be both government and opposition. They thrived on the idea of enemies, including enemies within. They did not fear bad publicity- rather, they actually wanted the worst of their actions to become widely known, all the better to make everyone, even those loyal to them, afraid (p. 200)

His brother Heinrich and children Erika and Klaus were more politically vocal than he was, and unable to believe that Hitler could usurp the strong German intellectualism that Mann so prized, and paralysed by fear for Katia’s Jewish parents (and perhaps conscious of his book sales) he took a long time to actually voice his opposition to Nazism, even though he had been on the National-Socialists’ radar for some time. It was only once he had managed to get to the United States- in itself a close-run thing, in spite of his contacts in high places- that he felt confident to openly express his anti-Nazi sentiments. However, he found that his status as a Nobel Prize winning author became a tool to be wielded by governments for their own purposes. The United States government wanted him to publicly warn of the dangers of Nazism, but remain silent on America’s own involvement in the war. After the war, the US government pressured him not to go to East Germany, which as a believer in the unity of the German spirit, he wanted to do. The FBI questioned him several times about the Communist leanings of his friends, and expressed their dissatisfaction with his East German visit. In the end, he left America and moved to Switzerland, where he died.

Much of this book is about Mann’s relationship with his family, which is certainly a strange one. The narrative perspective is entirely Thomas’, and he is probably the least interesting of them all. The whole basis of his marriage to Katia was off-kilter from the start, and it is hard to know what she made of his infatuations and constant appraisals of the men he met. Three of his children were homosexual: I don’t know quite what that says. He was in a constant intellectual competition with his older brother, who at times seemed to hate him, and his children were all rude to him- and he to them, in spite of supporting them financially. His demand for silent working time in his office set him apart from his family, and dominated family life. His two daughters committed suicide; a son died of an overdose. As is often the case with parents with a fraught relationship with their children, he gained more pleasure from his grandchildren than he ever did from his own children. His son Michael wrote:

I am sure the world is grateful to you for the undivided attention you have given to your books, but we, your children, do not feel any gratitude to you, or indeed to our mother, who sat by your side…It hardly bothers you, most likely, that these feelings of adulation are not shared by any of your children. (p.394)

Not a letter that any parent would want to receive from their child.

Running alongside this ‘respectable’ family man is his lifelong attraction to men, particularly young men. Age does not seem to weary him: right into his 70s he is still attracted to, and flirts with, young men. He wrote about his desires, including those involving his own son, in diaries which he feared falling into the wrong hands (well, any hands really) after he had to flee Germany.

There were two men that he did not become and he might make a book from them if he could conjure up their spirits properly. One was himself without his talent, without his ambition, but with the same sensibility. Someone fully at ease in a German democracy. A man who liked chamber music, lyric poetry, domestic quietness, gradual reform. A man, all conscience, who would have stayed in Germany even as Germany became barbaric, living a fearful life as an internal exile.

The other man who someone who did not know caution, whose imagination was as fiery and uncompromising as his sexual appetite, a man who destroyed those who loved him, who sought to make an art that was austere and contemptuous of all tradition, an art as dangerous as the world coming into shape. A man who had been brushed by demons, whose talent was the result of a pact with demons. (p. 332)

Then, interwoven with all this, is the presence of many other public figures: W. H. Auden (who married his daughter in a marriage of convenience as a cover for their homosexuality), Christopher Isherwood, Stefan Zweig, the Rooseveldts, Arthur Schoenberg, Mahler and the Washington Post owners, Agnes and Eugene Meyer.

Tóibín captures both these elements in this book. I found myself wondering what having it as a ‘fictionalized biography’ added to the book. The invented conversation and inner dialogue of fiction allowed him to flesh out these two aspects of his personality beyond a mere recitation of events, but the biographical aspect and the need to confine himself within actual events constrain the author from exploring his character as fully as he could have. Toibin’s Thomas Mann remains a rather bloodless man, and the members of his family even more so. With no footnotes, I had to just trust him as a biographer, and I don’t know whether my trust is justified or not. Mann remains an enigmatic and not particularly likeable character, but I suspect that Tóibín intended that from the start.

My rating: 7.5

Read because: Rosanna Readers selection

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library Bookgroups program.

‘Land’ by Maggie O’Farrell

2026, 434 p

I’ve been thinking recently about societies in collapse, and how they recover. Maggie O’Farrell’s Land is set in Ireland in 1865, some fifteen years after the Irish Famine (or as O’Farrell calls it, The Great Hunger) which caused the collapse of the predominantly (but not exclusively) Catholic Irish peasant economy, particularly in southern and western Ireland. Although it did not disturb the landlord and Ascendancy class particularly, it was disastrous for tenant farmers and small landholders, leading to the deaths of perhaps one million, and the emigration of a further million people (see fascinating Great Irish Famine Online site)

The book opens in 1865 with Tomás, a tenant farmer who was the sole survivor of the famine in his family. He is working as a surveyor with the British government on the Ordnance Survey in Ireland, which is redrawing its maps in the wake of the eviction and emigration which followed the famine. He hates the British government, but it is a form of income to eke out the meagre yield of his tenant farm. He has with him his young son Liam, who is assisting him with holding the surveying chains as they work their way across the countryside, asking the remaining farmers about the families who had lived in what are now ruins. Liam wanders off into a densely wooded copse which has somehow survived the timber-felling avarice of the landlord, and he and then his father come across a deep, sacred pool which seems to hold the history of Ireland over millenia and the stirring of Celtic mythology within its waters. Somehow Tomás has been deeply affected by what he saw in that pool and it triggers a restlessness and other-worldliness in him that affects his whole family. His mapmaking becomes an act of subversion by establishing as fact what has been obliterated.

The book traces the lives of this family as his wife Phina, whom he met as a child in an orphanage after her family had died or emigrated, and his four children Enda, Liam, Rose and Eugene. He moves the family from their city tenement room to a disused cottage on the peninsula where he encountered the pool, only to have the family disintegrate anew through death, emigration and capture by the Catholic Church that Tomás hated so much.

The book moves chronologically, shifting from one character to another, told in the present tense. The tone is reminiscent, as you might expect, of O’Farrell’s book Hamnet (my review here) and Instructions for a Heatwave (my review here). There is a lot of description, and relatively little dialogue. She introduces major plot developments abruptly, which I prefer as being the way things happen, instead of heavy foreshadowing. I liked that she leaves the ending open, and I did find myself caring about the characters. I’m surprised that it wasn’t longlisted for the 2026 Booker Prize as many predicted: she doesn’t seem to do very well with the Booker, having never been longlisted. However, I’ve never lost my ambivalence about O’Farrell’s writing which seems to reach for, but not attain, the complexity and elan of, say, Hilary Mantel’s work.

My rating: 8/10

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

Read because: I thought I’d try to get ahead of the Booker Prize Longlist 2026, but it didn’t make it. It wouldn’t have been a bad inclusion for the longlist, but I don’t see it as a shortlist nomination.

‘You Must Remember This’ by Sean Wilson

2025, 169 p

My mother died with Alzheimers. One day, when I wasn’t quite sure whether she knew who I was or not, she became quite agitated and said “It’s getting late. My mummy will be worried about me”. It was poignant: her mother had died when she was about 7, and I had never once in my life heard her refer to her “mummy”.

You Must Remember This is written from experience of child with a parent with Alzheimers- you can tell. The chapters are not in chronological order, with the book starting with Chapter 10 as Grace is heading along a busy road at night. This prompts her daughter Liz to put her into aged care, where she is bewildered by the presence of strangers, including her daughter. Memories come fleetingly, before she can put them into words.

As she struggles to find a firm footing for her memories, she goes back to her childhood with her alcoholic parents. Her father had been in the war and her mother worked as a nurse, but with such an alcohol problem you wonder how she held down a job. She met her husband Howard when she was working in an office although she didn’t remember that he had since died. She loved him all her life. These chapters are interspersed between the present day chapters, in no particular order.

The book is set in Western Australia and it ‘feels’ Australian. Wilson has a lovely turn of phrase: he describes an old man as having “cheeks like billiard balls” (p. 33) and when someone coughs, they make a sound “like an empty spray can” (p. 78).

This is only a small book – at 169 pages it’s a novella really- but it rings with authenticity. It was short-listed for the Miles Franklin but I don’t know if it has the heft to be a winner (and it didn’t). But it is sad, tender and you just know that it’s absolutely true.

My rating: 8/10

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

Read because: Miles Franklin shortlist.

‘I Deliver Parcels in Beijing’ by Hu Anyan

2025,319 p.

Translated by Jack Hargreaves 2025

What a strange book. I picked it up because I had heard that it was a best seller in China, and I was curious to know why. To be honest, having finished it, I still don’t know why this memoir was such a runaway success there, and who its Chinese readers might be.

The story itself is quite simple. The author is a young college-graduate who moves from home to take up a series of poorly-paid unskilled positions over a twenty-year period. His jobs include working in a logistics firm unpacking and packing items, delivering parcels for several courier companies, working in a hotel restaurant, selling bicycles, doing computer-aided artwork on comics, working in a bakery and working in his own companies selling clothes in a shopping mall. As he shifts from province to province seeking work, his accommodation often consists of an apartment partitioned into 5 sq metre ‘rooms’ with only space for a bed and a desk with shared bathroom facilities and only sometimes kitchen facilities. Sometimes he sleeps at the workplace. When working at the bicycle shop, for a 72 hour week, his rent was 1500 yuan per month, leaving him 2000 yuan per month to live on. In some of his jobs, food was provided, although often it was food that was left over. In the logistics job, the work statistics are so harsh that there is no time for toilet breaks and the temperature is so high that he sweats continuously. The hours are punishingly long. The courier job has expectations of customer service while at the same time offering such a pittance that compliance with any customer request puts him out of pocket. Companies take advantage of a three-day unpaid trial period, sometimes there is medical insurance and sometimes not, and employers take any opportunity to ‘stiff’ their workers. Amongst his co-workers he witnesses theft and dishonesty, but says nothing because he has to work alongside them. As he says:

The moral of the this story: When disgruntled, the lowly among us only have each other to pick on, because going after the powerful will only cost us in the end. (p. 202)

I see that the author was born in 1979, in the wake of the Cultural Revolution and at the start of Deng Xiaoping’s economic reforms that took China from a command economy to a market economy. He mentions a sister only once, but he does speak quite a bit about his parents. I found myself wondering how parents from such a starkly different type of economy would advise and equip their children to work in a new economy, unlike anything they had known (much like us as parents and grandparents parenting children who will work in an AI economy that is foreign to us).

My parents had only ever taught me to be kind to others. They failed to mention I also had to stick up for my own interests…Maybe because nobody had ever sat me known to talk it through before. My parents wouldn’t go near the topic. They had spent their whole lives in the same work units; the market economy was completely alien to them. …The thing was, my family was from out of town and had no relatives that lived nearby. My parents are unsociable folk, too. (p. 198)… I was starting to feel like my parents were to blame for all the rotten luck I had with people and work. They should have warned me. Their lessons on how to act had zero grounding in this world. They had said nothing about going after what I wanted, only that I should be frugal. What they told me was the wrong way to behave was exactly how everybody was behaving, and society wasn’t punishing them for it but rewarding the, and not just rewarding them, punishing me (p. 222)

Nonetheless, he did have his parents as a fall-back. Burnt out by the culture of exploitation and competitiveness, intimidated by the effort of having to interact with other people and yearning to have time to read and write, he returns to his parents’ home and in his own words, stays indoors for almost two years (p. 264). He later borrows money from them to set up one of his ultimately unsuccessful businesses. He does have a couple of girlfriends: indeed, it is because he wants to be with one of his girlfriends that he shifts from Guandong Province in 2018 to Beijing. He breaks up with another girlfriend when he is living and working in the store in Nanning, and she shifts overseas. He does not have friends, beyond his workmates and at work he is just as likely to make enemies as friends. I found myself wondering if his flight back to his parents’ home was an early example of tang ping, or lying flat culture, a rejection of societal pressure to over-work, a phenomenon in China particularly after COVID.

The structure of the book is unusual and rather hard to follow with a rather strange arrangement of chapters. The book sprang from a blog post written in 2020 (Chapter 2?) so perhaps that might explain why it is structured as it is. His story starts off in 2017 while he is working in Foshan as a package handler, but the chapter is written when he has been in Beijing for three years. The second chapter focuses on his time as a delivery worker in Beijing, followed his work in a convenience store, then in a neighbouring bike shop in Shanghai in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 is headed ‘Other Jobs I’ve Had’ where he lists jobs 1-8 (1: waiter 2: clothing store assistant 3: gas station attendant 4: fast food chain delivery 5: popsicle wholesaler 6: 3D architectural renderings 7: comic book artist 8: graphic designer for a startup magazine about anime). Jobs 9-11 were:

  • 9: copy shop attendant
  • 10: return to the anime magazine
  • 11: his own clothing store. He then has a lengthy section about writing and reading, complete with extracts from two pieces of his writing. He then continues with the job countdown-
  • 12: (2011) online store
  • 13: property management at a mall
  • 14: bakery shop
  • 15: deli stall
  • 16: selling rear view car cameras and car fresheners
  • 17: the logistics job described in Chapter 1 with D company
  • 18: parcel delivery with S Company
  • 19: parcel delivery with Pinjun Express, both described in Chapter 2.

In the closing pages of the book, as he loses his job with Pingun Express, he observes that he had alternated between two mutually exclusive states: working and writing. He tended to do either one or the other, spending half of his life free of work, and the other half consumed by it (p. 317). He considers the nature of “freedom”, which he considers a matter of consciousness, rather than of what you possess. He observes:

So, by freedom, I suppose I am referring to a personal pursuit of sorts, and self-realization through consciousness of our individual selves- the spiritual essence that differentiates one person from another. If more of us when after this kind of freedom, the world would be a more diverse, more inclusive, more equal and richer place. It would be all the more colorful. The pursuit of freedom is what shapes our individual trajectories, our personal goals, and stops us from having to vie for space on a single narrow path…Maybe it is something we can strive for but never quite attain, and maybe I will never reach it in my whole life, but that doesn’t matter. Because the pursuit is more precious than the attainment, and this holds true for every person and for the world as a whole- like our ideals and our convictions, it is the fulcrum of our lives, not their content (p. 315)

Is this valourization of freedom the appeal of the book to a Chinese audience, I wonder? I can’t even think of the word ‘freedom’ without hearing it come out of George W. Bush’s mouth, and it seems almost antithetical to the choreographed military displays in Tienanmen Square. Is the book’s popularity a somewhat subversive embrace of that? Or was the book a bestseller in China when the recipients of packages ordered online became curious about the lives of the people who delivered them to them? Or is the book popular with the tang ping generation, with him forging the way? At times the book reminded me of George Orwell’s Down and Out in London and Paris but this is no dilettante’s or journalist’s curiosity. The jobs came first and the writing emerged later, and it seems that the author is still oscillating between the two, without the choice to leave it all behind as Orwell did.

Most of all, it made me realize how little I know about China.

My rating: 7/10

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

Read because: I had read an article in the Guardian about it.

‘I Eat the Stars’ by Sarah Wilson

2026,283p. & notes

I can’t think of a book that I have read recently that has annoyed me yet affirmed me in equal measure as much as this book did. I still haven’t worked out which response is stronger.

Near the end of the book Wilson sums up her argument in a nutshell:

Facing collapse…allows us to finally get around to exploring the beautiful questions we ache to answer within ourselves. It very literally forces us to confront what matters most. What matters when we ‘lose it all’… Climate collapse has gotten us to confront truth in a fully adult way. The AI threat has us reckoning with what actually makes us us. I feel now that it is all steering us- with considerable urgency and force- to live simpler, more connected lives. To rise into a fuller, more mature, evolved expression of ourselves- as many other tumultuous, liminal, revolutionary times in history have tended to do (p. 253-4)

Even looking at this quote evokes both the things I really disliked and things I embraced in this book.

Let’s start with the ‘dislikes’ first, so that I can end on a more uplifting note.

Sarah Wilson is an Australian author and journalist who wrote I Quit Sugar, a book about anxiety First, We Make the Beast Beautiful and a book about forging a radically hopeful life forward This One Wild and Precious Life. For once, the library’s category sticker of ‘Wellbeing’ is spot-on, and I loathe wellbeing books. Warning sign number one.

This book emerged out of her Wild with Sarah Wilson podcasts, where I gather she interviews interesting people and collapsologists (who knew there was such a field) and has created her own community of podcast and Substack listeners and commentators. I am a podcast listener myself – and may indeed subscribe to her podcast feed because she does have interesting people- but the narrative tone of this book doesn’t rise above the gushing, please-like-me tone of a podcast (much as the tone of this review would be inappropriate for the Australian Book Review). Warning sign number two

She uses ‘overwhelm’ as a noun. Often. The whole book very much about her. Here she is, talking about what she is doing in order to remain faithful: meditate, dance, maximize her menstrual cycle, cry, hurt, cry more, move out of the house when she is frozen in fear, hyperventilate with nervous energy. (p.277). All part of the wellbeing trope that I dislike so much. Warning sign number three.

Moreover, much of the book is a pastiche of other people’s writing. Of course, all academics and writers draw on the work of other people. But this is more than footnoting: she describes this as ‘soul nerding’:

the practice, or art, of absorbing the considered reflections of smart, deep minds who have wrangled as we do now (p. 157)

But when does this move from drawing on knowledge and wisdom to becoming little more than a commonplace book? Even the layout of the book, with sections rarely longer than 2 pages and sometimes as short as a paragraph, separated by an asterisk, suggests a lighting upon one thought, then another, then another. Warning sign number four.

Enough griping. What did I like about the book?

I accept and agree with her perception of the world as rushing towards collapse. It terrifies me. I had to pull myself up at one stage and think “Hold on. I’m a historian. I know about this stuff”. It pushed me into thinking about Cambodia after Pol Pot; I thought back to Barbara Tuchman’s A Distant Mirror: The Calamitous 14th century; my area is 19th century Australian colonial history which saw the collapse of societies that went back millenia and millenia and millenia; I’ve been listening to podcasts about the Roman Empire for years. Humans do survive. Not all of them- indeed, a minority of them. Things do not ‘go back to normal’ but they do not stop either. Some things remain – the most important things – and they are woven into something completely different. Not without pain and sorrow – so much pain and sorrow- but they go on.

She talks about her own shift from being a climate change activist and trying to stop climate collapse, to instead giving up on hoping for better to contemplate that collapse and what it means for us. She discusses ‘prepping’ but eschews it because she asks the question- if I have prepped and others haven’t, what sort of person will that make me?

I’ve been thinking a lot recently about AI and humanity. So has she- along with many others.

…now the tech threat we face is forcing us to define ourselves away from the very AI that we efforted into being. This threat necessarily gets us asking, where does humanity end and artificial intelligence start? If AI can take our jobs and solve our technical and existential problems, if it can take the place of bones-and-beating-hearts lovers and replicate our most intimate art, what is left? What will AI never be able to take? Which is to ask: what is it that makes us human and what makes a human life worthwhile? We might have been avoiding the answer for some time, but can’t any longer (p. 117)

She is aware of herself (probably an offshoot of the self-absorption that I so disliked). She talks about ‘uncertainty intolerance’ and the encouragement in our culture to grasping for certitude, especially through 3-step You Tube videos and bedside self-help manuals. She reminds herself to watch herself over this tendency:

I’ve developed seductive techniques over decades of being a journalist, a story-teller and a self-anointed defender of things. I can often convince others- and myself- of whatever I set my mind to because I have the language to do so; I’ve mastered the certitude game (p. 147)

She notes a recent Brookings analysis that almost 2/3 of climate activists in the United States are women with an average age of fifty-two. She is fifty-two. I am fifty-two plus 18 years. One of my frequent declamations while watching the world news, as I see business meetings, tech bros, and the rapid disappearance of women on the world stage “All those bloody MEN!”. She makes a place for “a mature, feminised style of wisdom and leadership that all men and women can lean into and benefit from” (p. 242).

She is not afraid of spirituality. This is something I grapple with, and something that I am trying to integrate into myself through my involvement with Unitarian Universalism. How many other people, I wonder, sat with the census form, feeling that ‘No Religion’ wasn’t quite right, and yet not knowing how to define what you are? (thank heavens for the fill-in box).

She calls for us to create ‘islands of sanity’, a concept that she takes from Meg Wheatley:

…intentional spaces, conversations, even ways of being in which calm, considered, accepting, forgiving responses and approaches are lived out. These islands are not places where we fix the whole system. They are where we preserve human values, sanity and coherence in small communities in advance of the chaos ahead. They exist as a gentle invitation for anyone who chooses to lift that scab of denial and finds themselves tumbling into that lonely, frightening realm most of you reading this are in (p. 139).

I guess that’s what I’m trying to do in my own life: draw on the wisdom of other people, learn from history, create and build an island of sanity.

I do wonder where she goes after this book. I don’t think there’s any going back to writing books about sugar. Is she going to ramp it up even further or will she just repeat herself in book after book?

Rating: So, reduced to the algorithmic demand of Goodreads, or my own imperfect rating scale- what would I give this book? 9.5/10 for making me think? 5/10 for the narrative voice and self-absorption of it all? I’ll probably settle on 3/5 for Goodreads (because they rank in five stars).

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

Read because: I liked the title (which comes from a poem: Sometimes as an antidote/to fear of death/ I eat the stars.) Also, my Unitarian fellowship is going to discuss it in September.

‘The Heart’s Invisible Furies’ by John Boyne

2017, 701 p.

SPOILERS

It sometimes occurs that I read a series of books that seem to speak to each other. If I were choosing my books through a chatbot, then I would assume that the sequence was driven by an algorithm. But my last two books were chosen because (a) A Visit from the Goon Squad was an Ivanhoe Reading Circle selection and (b) You Must Remember This was shortlisted for the Miles Franklin and I was interested to read the shortlist. Then The Heart’s Invisible Furies finally became available after literally months on hold at the library -reserved for a reason I can no longer remember- so it must be coincidence rather than an algorithm that has brought me three books in a row that ‘speak’ to each other.

It’s uncanny, though, that all three books look at a life or lives over a span of time, complete with the sliding-doors moment when things could have worked out differently. However, The Heart’s Invisible Furies, unlike the other two books, does not play around with sequencing and plotlines to show off (as in the case of Egan’s book) or to demonstrate a memory in decline (as in You Must Remember This). It’s a relief to read a book that starts at the beginning and just goes through to the end, without any narrative pyrotechnics.

The book in in three long parts, each with several chapters arranged chronologically. It opens in 1945 with the narrator’s sixteen year old mother Catherine Goggin being expelled from the Catholic church on account of her pregnancy. Her own family shuns her and she makes her way to Dublin, living with Sean and his lover Jack Smoot in a small flat as she manages to obtain a position in the tearoom at the Daíl Eireann , the Irish Parliament. Chapter II takes us to 1952 when our narrator Cyril is adopted by Charles and Maude Avery, a childless couple who, while feeding, housing and educating him, never let him forget that he’s ‘not a real Avery’. Cyril does not know his birth parents, and he has no interest in finding them. Charles is serially unfaithful to his wife and shady in his business dealings, while Maude writes books that she hopes no-one will read because it is ‘vulgar’ to be popular. As a seven year old boy, Cyril meets Julian Woodbead when his father Max is acting as Charles’ solicitor, and he falls in love with him instantly. Chapter III is set in 1959 when Julian and Cyril meet again at school and share a room. By 1966 in Chapter IV Cyril has finished school and is working at the Department of Education in the Daíl Eireann building where his unrecognized birth mother works. Meanwhile Julian is travelling through Europe with one of his many girlfriends while the unwilling Cyril becomes a reluctant but celibate boyfriend to one of his co-workers Mary-Margaret Muffet. (Boyne does have fun with his names). By 1973 in Chapter V we find Cyril engaged to Julian’s sister Alice, who had previously been jilted at the altar, and on his wedding day he finally admits to Julian his attraction to him. Julian is furious; the wedding goes ahead, but Cyril flees.

Part II ‘Exile’ opens in 1980 in Amsterdam, where Cyril fled after the wedding fiasco. He has found love with Bastiaan, a trainee doctor and he is working at the Ann Frank House. They socialize at MacIntyre’s pub, owned by Jack Smoot who, unknown to Cyril, had shared lodgings with Cyril’s mother. Together Cyril and Bastiaan take over the care of Ignac, a Slovenian rentboy they find on the street who has been pimped by his father. Again, Cyril needs to flee, ending up with Bastiaan and Ignac in New York in 1987 where Bastiaan is working as a physician dealing with AIDS patients. Here he encounters Julian again, and promises to pass a message back to his erst-while bride and Julian’s sister Alice. Before this happens, tragedy strikes.

In Part III by 1994 Cyril has returned to Ireland alone.Ignac has become a very popular children’s author and his adoptive father, Cyril, is in jail again for tax avoidance. His adoptive mother Maude has died of lung cancer and, although she would have hated the thought, her works have become highly lauded and she is a towering, if deceased, figure in the Irish literary scheme. He keeps his promise to tell Alice about Julian’s death, and becomes drawn into Alice’s family with her new partner, also called Cyril, and Alice’s son Liam. In 2001 he accompanies Ignac on a book tour to Slovenia and has become even more ensconced within Alice’s new family. By 2008 he is approaching death, having experienced both loss and discovery.

The book reminded me of Douglas Stewart’s Shuggie Bain and John of John but with the sprawling riotousness of a John Irving book (to whom the book is dedicated) mixed with Charles Dickens. I laughed out loud several times and I wondered just how long Boyne could sustain the tension of Cyril’s final admission of his homosexuality, and the discovery of his birth mother. Quite a while, as it turned out, but the missed opportunities only heightened the tension. He captures very well the censoriousness of Irish society, underpinned by the hypocrisy of the Catholic Church.

Having enjoyed the ride so far, I was disappointed in the ending which lapsed into sentimentality and excessive tidiness. My disillusionment with the ending was further heightened by the Author’s Note on The Heart’s Invisible Furies which started as a ‘how I came to write this book’ but descended into a spiteful denunciation of his failed relationships. I should have stopped reading a chapter before the end.

But until then, I really enjoyed a story told chronologically, with a flawed but ultimately likeable narrator. I hadn’t realized that John Boyne was the author of The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, which despite its best-seller status has attracted much criticism. Boyne himself has had his own battles within the culture wars. I’m not going to let that spoil my enjoyment of the book: I could barely put it down, and the disappointment I had with the ending came from the book itself, and not the controversy surrounding its author.

My rating: – how to rate it? If I’d stopped before the last chapter it would have been a 9.5 but given that I didn’t, perhaps 8?

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library

Read because: I think I must have read a very positive review of it somewhere. I have had it on reserve since last year, so an 8 month wait!

‘A Visit from the Goon Squad’ by Jennifer Egan

2010 (2011) 349 p.

I had heard a lot about this book, and it hadn’t registered with me that it was written in 2010, which in these days of deluge of new titles is an eon ago. I don’t know why I didn’t read it at the time- it must not have appealed to me- and I’m not sure that it appeals to me now, sixteen years later. The title evoked a mafia, true-crime book, and the blurbs crowed with praise without actually denoting what the book was. I’m not sure that I even know what the book is, either.

The book starts with the two characters who are the linchpins of the book. The first is Sasha, personal assistant to a record producer who ‘picks up’ two things in the first chapter: a younger man called Alex whom she takes home for sex, and a wallet stolen from the handbag of another woman while she was in the toilet. The second is Bennie Salazar, Sasha’s former employer, who founded Sow’s Ear records and is still immersed in the music of the 1970s. These two characters are the linchpin, but only because the other characters have or have had a tangential relationship with them in the forty-odd years covered by this book. It’s like a book of six-degrees-of-separation, or a form of narrative doodling, where the author creates a character and then plays with them. The thirteen chapters each have a different character as their focus, slipping backwards and forwards in time, occasionally voiced in the first person, or in the format of a Powerpoint presentation. There are a lot of characters, and as you’re reading you’re not quite sure whether you’ve met them before. There are two musicians, washed up by the 1990s: Scotty, a semi-derelict who goes back to Bennie the record producer and launches a last open-air concert, hyped by influencers, and Bosco, a member of the Conduits, the bank that launched Bennie’s career who wants to commit suicide on stage but ends up recovering from cancer. There’s Dolly the publicist who holds a disastrous party and ends up in jail for negligence, who becomes a publicist for a dictator. There’s Rob, Sasha’s ‘pretend boyfriend’ at college, who dies in a drug-fuelled swim in the East River. There’s Lou, the hedonistic record producer, thrice married and the father of six children.

The ‘goon squad’ of the title is not a bunch of mafia thugs, as I suspected, but instead is time. ‘Time’s a goon, right? You gonna let that goon push you around?’ Two of the characters- Scotty and Bosco- both question how they started off at one place and ended up at another. When Scotty, disheveled and disturbed turns up in Bennie’s plush office he says

…I came for this reason: I want to know what happened between A and B…A is when we were both in the band, chasing the same girl. B is now. (p. 107)

Bosco wants to produce a new record ‘A to B’

The album’s called A to B, right? And that’s the question I want to hit straight on: How did I go from being a rock star to being a fat fuck no one cares about? Let’s not pretend it didn’t happen…Time’s a goon, right? Isn’t that the expression? (p. 134)

This question lies at the heart of the book- and indeed, in the heart of anyone over the age of, say, fifty who can look back at their life and wonder how they got there. What are the hinge-points; what are the inevitabilities? What if…what if.. It’s a big question but I don’t know if this multi-layered, tangled story is the best way to address it. There is a discipline to the book, and an overarching structure, but you have to work very hard to find it.

This book was discussed at the recent Ivanhoe Reading Circle meeting (which I missed) and both the presenter there, and several blogs I’ve read (including Louise at A Strong Belief in Wicker) felt that the book definitely deserved a second reading. Indeed some people have spent an inordinate amount of time reconstructing the timelines of the characters of the stories. I can see, just by flipping through the first chapter, that a second reading would yield a tapestry of threads that I hadn’t noticed on the first reading. But for me, a first reading should bring its own rewards, rather than needing a second reading to make it intelligible. As it is, each chapter is self-contained, and reads almost as a short story in its own right (indeed, several were published in the New Yorker as stand-alones). In a world drowning in new publications, I don’t know if any author has the right to demand two readings of any book to make it coherent: a second reading should be a joyful choice, not a post-requisite.

My rating: 7/10

Sourced from: purchased second hand from Brotherhood Books

Read because: Ivanhoe Reading Circle August 2026 selection.

‘Enshittification: Why Everything Suddenly Got Worse and What to Do About it’ by Cory Doctorow

2025, 334 p.

How wonderful to invent a term, and then find out that it has been declared Word of the Year, as the Macquarie Dictionary did in 2024. ‘Enshittification’ captures perfectly our frustration and impotence when huge multinational create and change their own rules, deliberately degrading their products and holding us hostage to price-hikes, leaving us to rue that we had ever been drawn in by what seemed to hold such promise.

Enshittification has four stages:

  1. First, platforms are good to their users
  2. Then they abuse their users to make things better for their business customers
  3. Next, they abuse those business customers to claw back all the value for themselves
  4. Finally, they have become a great pile of shit (p. 10)

His main targets are Facebook, Amazon, IPhone (Apple), Twitter and Google. He addresses the first four as these as separate case studies, but for all of them the process of enshittification is the same. But it’s not just these four companies: in effect, anything that is ‘smart’ holds you hostage to the manufacturer, even though you have purchased it. So we see a SNOO Smark Sleeper ‘smart’ basinette that rocks a baby to sleep suddenly demanding $20 per month for them NOT to disable the features, if you should dare to use it for a second child, or sell it to someone else. We see ‘smart’ cars requiring mechanics who have the capabilities to repair them to apply (and you to pay) for a code to override the engine being disabled. Even artificial eyes, grafted onto patients’ eyes, can be ‘bricked’ by the company should it fall into difficulties. If “there’s an app for that” then use of the app propels you into a different legal realm where the design of the app pre-empts all other claims to intellectual property of the content.

The constant screwing of competitors, users and customers; the cynical takeover of competitors and quashing of their products; the ongoing adjustment of ‘terms and conditions’ where ongoing participation signifies consent – these companies are appalling. But the cost of leaving, and the withdrawal of face-to-face alternatives by government departments and banks draws us more and more under their control.

The book is not necessarily about AI but he introduces the idea of ‘reverse centaur’ here, which he takes up in more detail in his most recent book The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to Life After AI. The mythological centaur, you’ll remember, was a man on top with the legs of a horse, or in automation terms, a worker who has some kind of tool that lets them do more than they could do on their own (p. 121). A farmer with a tractor is a centaur, and so too is a cashier using a register that adds up the groceries and tells how much change to give (oh! how I would have loved such a machine when I worked the register at a neighbourhood hardware store!) [On the other hand, I could and still can work out change, which is something that I doubt many cashiers could do today]. But a reverse-centaur is a machine that uses a human to accomplish more than the machine could manage on its own (p.120). In particular he looks at the working conditions of Amazon delivery drivers, as exposed on the documentary The Great Amazon Heist, which you can watch on SBS On Demand.

He picks up on Yanis Varoufakis’ thesis expressed in Technofeudalism: What Killed Capitalism, where technology was transformed after the 2008 GFC from a primarily profit-seeking enterprise to a primarily rent-seeking enterprise (p. 197) Because the tech giants control the ‘factors of production’, they are imposing a form of rent onto the rest of us. Microsoft Office can now only be bought as a subscription, not an outright product that you own; a purchased e-book can be removed from the platform whenever the app decides; a digital subscription to a magazine only gives you access to the archive as long as you keep paying the subscription fee.

The power of these tech companies over politics is daunting. When Doctorow was half-way through the writing of this book Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term where, with Elon Musk, he set about dismantling the legislative restraints that had been placed on some of their power during the Biden era. The legal power they wield is disproportionate too, and often wielded against third parties: a blind person is allowed to break proprietary software to upload it to a text reader, but a sighted person risks huge fines in assisting them to do so. The financial penalty for an author allowing a purchaser to move their purchased audiobook to another platform break DRM software would cover the purchase of thousands of CDs.

After cataloguing this world of woe, Doctorow finishes by outlining the ‘cure’: a noble enterprise, but one which he does not carry off convincingly. He argues that competition, regulation, interoperability and tech worker power are four forces which discipline technology firms. The only competition I can see amongst the tech firms is their race to enshittify everything they touch. Thank heavens for government-owned enterprises like ABC, BBC and to a lesser extent SBS, but they are under huge pressure from tech firms and the media companies that are in a love/hate relationship with them to enshittify their own offerings. Competition regulators all over the world seem to be toothless. Privacy policies are presented as an all-or-nothing ‘agreement’ and I don’t think that it’s in the conspiracy-realm theory to suspect that your phone is listening to you when an email advertising something you discussed suddenly appears in your inbox. When tech-bros parade around with their heavy-framed smart glasses, all privacy is gone. Attempts to force tech companies to pay for news led to Facebook pulling community pages before grudgingly allowing access again- and this fight hasn’t finished. Attempts to limit social media for children (which I always saw as more a way of empowering parents and schools to say ‘no’ than actually outsmarting a tech-savvy adolescent) are being adopted, but always under scrutiny for their ineffectiveness- which lies in the lands of the tech companies anyway. He looks at the successful Silicon Valley tech workers who walked out a Google as a form of power, but he’s looking at dead men (because they are overwhelmingly men) walking. AI will sap any power they might have.

This is an eye-opening book, but I came away feeling enshittified, rather than empowered. I know that his next book The Reverse Centaur’s Guide to Life After AI takes up the issue of AI, but I fear that his faith in ‘cures’, which are being dismantled and rendered impotent before our very eyes, is not reassuring. But if you want specific examples of enshittification (an index would have been much appreciated) and to feel oppressed and angry, then this is your book.

My rating: 8.5/10

Sourced from: Yarra Plenty Regional Library (at least he’ll get the Lending Rights payment directly, I guess)

Read because: I had heard the hype about the term.

‘The Man Who Stole the Gods’ by Matthew Campbell

2026, 432 p.

When I last visited the National Museum of Cambodia in 2024, there was a special gallery devoted to artefacts that had been returned from overseas museums. Alerted as we are to stolen artefacts by the ABC Program ‘The Things the British Stole’ and Australian’s own disgruntlement at the British Museum’s refusal to return the Gweagal Shield, I was interested to see the celebration of the return of Cambodia heritage objects. But having read this book, I will take even more interest next time because right there, in the middle of the picture is the statue of the Hindu God Shiva and his son Skanda (rendered as a little boy standing before Shiva) which is one of the cultural artefacts specially named in this book.

The ‘man who stole the Gods’ was British expatriate and Bangkok resident Douglas Latchford, who was first entranced by Cambodian artworks in the 1950s. By the 1970s, having become very wealthy as manager of an ‘agency’ bringing consumer goods to Thailand he was in a position to indulge his passion for Cambodian artefacts, following the example of an American spy Jim Thompson, who was a major collector. He channelled much of his stolen bounty to the Metropolitan Museum of Art through Thomas Hoving, its 36 year old director who was ambitious to bolster the Met’s collection during the boom years following WW2. His successor was Martin Lerner, who was appointed chief curator of Indian and Southeast Asian art at the Met. For the Met collectors, Douglas Latchford was their man.

Latchford had two passions. One of them was young Thai bodybuilders, and after a failed sham marriage to a Thai women which yielded a daughter, Julia, he was free to surround himself with powerfully built young men. His other passion was ancient Cambodian stone.

Latchford had an encyclopedic knowledge of Khmer civilization, attained through study, travel and incessant collection. He was generally dismissive of art historians and academics. He became a trusted partner to Spink & Son in London, Britain’s premier source for Asian antiquities, and developed a near-monopoly on the artefacts that he sent to UK. However, the 1970 UNESCO Convention on the Means of Prohibiting the Illicit Import, Export and Transfer of Ownership of Cultural Property meant that the artefacts he was sending had to have a minimally plausible origin story. He established a relationship with scholar Emma Bunker, who despite few publications to her name and no PhD, had sufficient academic reputation to convince buyers that their intended purchases would not fall foul of the 1970 UNESCO convention. She managed to obtain letterheads from legitimate dealers who had operated prior to the 1970 cutoff and had a signed letter from a prominent now-deceased Spink executive so that she could generate the paperwork to attest that the artworks had secure provenance. He also could draw on the reputation of Nancy Wiener, a prominent New York art dealer with a gallery on East 74th Street.

Meanwhile, suspicions were arising about Latchford’s activities, both in Cambodia and the United States. In US Special Agent Brendon Easter from the Department of Homeland Security (huh- perhaps they do act well sometimes) and Alexander Wilson, a prosecutor at the Southern District of New York court investigated the proposed sale by Sotherby’s Auctions of the Duryodhana, an important artefact excavated from Koh Ker. In Cambodia, archaeologist Bourdonneau excavated ruins and found pedestals where statues had been removed. Bradley Gordon, an attorney in Phnom Penh, led a team of young Cambodian lawyers acting from the Cambodian side.

Most importantly for the investigation, they found Toek Tik, who had been one of the men who had excavated the artefacts over many years. Living first under the Khmer Rouge, and then through the civil war which followed the Vietnamese invasion to topple Pol Pot, he was now old and sick and remorseful that he had ever been involved in the theft of Cambodia’s gods. Although unable to read and write, he had a good memory for what was located where, and he was able to lead investigators to the sites where the pedestals and remnants stood, making it possible to link the exported artefacts and the location.

But as the net closed in, it was never certain that the artefacts would actually be surrendered, even though it could be proved that they had been looted after the 1970 Convention (indeed, right up to the 1990s). One heavy purchaser from Latchford was Jim Clark, a computer-technology millionaire who had made his money through Netscape (remember Netscape?), who had spent $35 million on 30 pieces between 2003-2007 via Latchford, on the say-so of forged documentation. Julia Latchford, Latchford’s daughter and heir, found that her financial movements were circumscribed by the legal scrutiny under which Latchford’s affairs had been placed, and in 2021 she signed an agreement with the Cambodian government to return all of his Khmer works. Investigators found themselves poring over architectural magazines that featured luxury homes, in order to focus their search for particular objects.

Works from the Clark and Latchford collections found their way back to Cambodia, but most disturbing for me was the intransigence of the Metropolitan Museum of Art. While I note that two more pieces were returned on June 10 2026 to join the fourteen others returned in 2023 that I saw while in Phnom Penh, it wasn’t certain that the Met would relinquish custodianship.

The book’s focus is the stolen artefacts, but along the way it gives a good history of Cambodia generally for people who are not familiar with it. Matthew Campbell puts his journalistic skills to good use, combining his investigative work in tracking the networks across multiple continents, with a succinct telling of Cambodian history. I’ve been working on improving my knowledge of this history, but I admit that I hadn’t realized the length or tragedy of the civil war following Pol Pot’s overthrow. There is nothing good that can be said about the Khmer Rouge, but they did not intentionally damage the temples, and much of the looting that took place occurred during the civil war period when the whole society was in turmoil. That wealthy museums like the Met should take advantage of this societal breakdown, and so recently, is shameful.

It is right that these gods should be back in Cambodia where they belong. They have outlasted collectors, connoisseurs, museum curators, gallery owners, and the impoverished men who were drawn by the (meagre) money they were offered to dig up their own heritage. And that’s just the way it should be:

The artworks that had determined the course of Latchford’s life were as eternal as anything crafted by human hands. When he discovered them, they had already survived for a millennium or longer, silent witnesses to the rise and fall of kings, the arrival and retreat of new religions, and, ultimately, the ravaging of the nation that had created them, in the service of an ideology that would have been incomprehensible to their makers. To obtain them and hold on to them, to hoard them and profit from them, Latchford had stolen, lied, and cheated, ruining relationships and breaking laws. But even this intense connection was transient. Immortality was the preserve of gods in stone and bronze. (Ch. 28)

My rating: 8.5/10

Sourced from: purchased e-book (hence the absence of page numbers in my quotations)

Read because: my son in Phnom Penh recommended it. There’s a two-part ABC podcast about it called Kidnapping the Gods