MobileRead Forums - View Single Post - Literary Remembering Babylon by David Malouf

caleb72 · 10-18-2015, 02:30 AM

So I finished this one.

I think the title itself is interesting for this book. I couldn't work out at first whether Babylon was referring to the England/Scotland the new settlers left behind (particularly from the perspective of Gemmy), or the earlier days of settlement remembered by Lachlan/Janet at the end of the book.

Babylon is an interesting allusion because I think the biblical city can represent more than one thing. It's sometimes thought of as a wealthy and hedonistic city, and has many references in the Bible - including the Tower of Babel. It was a fertile city and (at one stage in history) the largest in the world. So why is Malouf referring to it in the title?

Firstly, language and the interpretation of language appears several times in the novel. Gemmy's gibberish being interpreted by the town, the more subtle communication between Lachlan and Gemmy, a few places where the land itself was communicating with characters (Frazer and Jock), the subtleties of communication between Leona and several characters, the communication between Janet and the bees, Gemmy's non-verbal communication with the indigenous vistors etc..

Secondly, there's something about the "building" of the town/city/state of Queensland that seems something like an ambition of sorts. Bowen is injecting classical sensibilities and attempting to make a name for himself. England is expanding its colony with Queensland targeted to be a large and prosperous area. There seems to be a small echo here of the once-grand Babylon and a nearer parallel with the "Babylon" left behind in the United Kingdom.

Outside of the Babylon tie-in, I really liked the characterisation of the colonists. There was a constant fear in Australia: of the natives, of the wide and unknown land that they didn't understand. It had none of the bland and one-dimensional "racism" that it could have been and was more about the ways in which they approached colonisation. It wasn't about integrating themselves into a completely different environment, taking of its plenty and developing a harmony which the land and people around them. It would more about trying to transform the land into something they already knew and understood. And while they had this deeply embedded philosophy, they could only approach what was there already with fear and confusion.

Gemmy was an example of what could happen if you approached the land and its people with none of that. What about his previously life would he want to transplant? I also got a hint of other characters starting to get this message - to see what was around them without the blinkers of past experience. This is where some of the beauty of the novel lay. Unfortunately, those affected were too few to really make an impression on the fear of the others.

I think Malouf is mature enough not to focus this fear only on the indigenous tribes. He uses Gemmy as an example of how fear is nothing if not adaptable. It finds the connections it needs to take root. This is played out again in the later part of the novel when more than one person becomes the focus of such fear during the first World War. Even our neighbours, once so familiar, become strange and threatening under the right conditions.

I only gave this book 3 stars. I really enjoyed the prose and the various messages that I could explore. However, I found it fairly ordinary as a story. The switching of perspectives meant that there were several tales told here, but few if any ever felt resolved in any way. Some seemed incidental like that of George Abbott and many seemed to peter out as if forgotten.

I'm glad I read it though as it took a really interesting perspective on the colonisation of Australia.

10-18-2015, 02:30 AM	#12
caleb72 Indie Advocate Posts: 2,863 Karma: 18794463 Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: Melbourne, Australia Device: Kindle	So I finished this one. I think the title itself is interesting for this book. I couldn't work out at first whether Babylon was referring to the England/Scotland the new settlers left behind (particularly from the perspective of Gemmy), or the earlier days of settlement remembered by Lachlan/Janet at the end of the book. Babylon is an interesting allusion because I think the biblical city can represent more than one thing. It's sometimes thought of as a wealthy and hedonistic city, and has many references in the Bible - including the Tower of Babel. It was a fertile city and (at one stage in history) the largest in the world. So why is Malouf referring to it in the title? Firstly, language and the interpretation of language appears several times in the novel. Gemmy's gibberish being interpreted by the town, the more subtle communication between Lachlan and Gemmy, a few places where the land itself was communicating with characters (Frazer and Jock), the subtleties of communication between Leona and several characters, the communication between Janet and the bees, Gemmy's non-verbal communication with the indigenous vistors etc.. Secondly, there's something about the "building" of the town/city/state of Queensland that seems something like an ambition of sorts. Bowen is injecting classical sensibilities and attempting to make a name for himself. England is expanding its colony with Queensland targeted to be a large and prosperous area. There seems to be a small echo here of the once-grand Babylon and a nearer parallel with the "Babylon" left behind in the United Kingdom. Outside of the Babylon tie-in, I really liked the characterisation of the colonists. There was a constant fear in Australia: of the natives, of the wide and unknown land that they didn't understand. It had none of the bland and one-dimensional "racism" that it could have been and was more about the ways in which they approached colonisation. It wasn't about integrating themselves into a completely different environment, taking of its plenty and developing a harmony which the land and people around them. It would more about trying to transform the land into something they already knew and understood. And while they had this deeply embedded philosophy, they could only approach what was there already with fear and confusion. Gemmy was an example of what could happen if you approached the land and its people with none of that. What about his previously life would he want to transplant? I also got a hint of other characters starting to get this message - to see what was around them without the blinkers of past experience. This is where some of the beauty of the novel lay. Unfortunately, those affected were too few to really make an impression on the fear of the others. I think Malouf is mature enough not to focus this fear only on the indigenous tribes. He uses Gemmy as an example of how fear is nothing if not adaptable. It finds the connections it needs to take root. This is played out again in the later part of the novel when more than one person becomes the focus of such fear during the first World War. Even our neighbours, once so familiar, become strange and threatening under the right conditions. I only gave this book 3 stars. I really enjoyed the prose and the various messages that I could explore. However, I found it fairly ordinary as a story. The switching of perspectives meant that there were several tales told here, but few if any ever felt resolved in any way. Some seemed incidental like that of George Abbott and many seemed to peter out as if forgotten. I'm glad I read it though as it took a really interesting perspective on the colonisation of Australia.