Skip to content

Meanjin’s Tournament of Books 2011, Zombie Rounds

December 3, 2011

Just one round of Meanjin‘s tournament of books to go … after this one, that is.

The Zombie round comprises the winners of Semifinals 1 and 2 being pitted against the books returned to the fray by reader vote in the Zombie poll (on which I reported at the end of the Semifinals post).

Zombie Round 1: Joan London’s Gilgamesh defeated Alexis Wright’s Carpentaria

Well, hmmm … I don’t have a particular problem with the winner here as they are both very fine books. I love Gilgamesh and would not be sorry to see it win, though I did have a slight preference for Carpentaria because of the “bigness” (to use my best litcrit terminology) of its idea/s and language. It is a larger than life novel that takes you on a very wild ride. And it explores some of the conflicts and challenges faced by contemporary Indigenous Australians, something we need to see more of in our contemporary literature. But, this judging was odd. Firstly, the judge was First Dog on the Moon, the pseudonym of Andrew Marlton, the cartoonist for the independent electronic magazine Crikey. This is fair enough, but he got his facts wrong. He described the two books he was judging as “zombie” books. However, only one is. And then, the judging took the form of a cartoon. It was just a little too light-hearted, a little too minimal … but perhaps, really, he took just the right tack. We’ll get a winner in the end but we all know, don’t we, that all the books are winners!

Zombie Round 2: Helen Garner’s The children’s Bach defeated Miles Franklin’s My brilliant career

Ah well, the grand old dame of Australian literature, the bequeather of our (arguably) most important literary prize, has been toppled off her perch by the zombie! Just shows it’s never over till it’s over, eh? Lorelei Vashti, the judge, uses some rather odd criteria to make her decision – she likes the old-fashioned (or, is that, oldfashioned) way Garner’s book used “ear-rings” for “earrings”; she believes (and gives examples) that men called Harry always get the girl but Franklin’s Sybylla rejects her Harry for a career! In the end, being (semi-) serious, she gives it to Garner because, and I’ll quote:

So, in conclusion: near the end of The Children’s Bach, Philip instructs a girl who is trying to write pop song lyrics: ‘Make gaps. Don’t chew on it. Don’t explain everything. Leave holes,’ and that there is a Garner masterclass; it’s precisely what her book does. You never find her doing something so obvious as, for example, rhyming Harry with marry; this book is all about the gaps and holes.

I do think Garner is a very fine writer, so I won’t argue – though I probably wouldn’t have argued with the alternative either. It’s that sort of tournament after all.

Next …

The Final. Who will win? Gilgamesh or The children’s Bach? Which would you vote for?

10 Comments leave one →
  1. December 3, 2011 6:24 pm

    I’m still waiting for my copies of Gilgamesh and Carpentaria to arrive and I read The Children’s Bach way back in the eighties, so no comment! But on another note I am really enjoying Kazuo Ishiguro’s Nocturnes which I bought after reading about it here? Beautiful!

    • December 4, 2011 12:24 am

      Oh good, Catherine. I really liked it too … As you know. I look forward to hearing what you think of those two WHEN you get them and can find time to read them!

  2. December 3, 2011 6:51 pm

    Hi Sue, I’m really enjoying your running commentary – I’ve certainly added some books to the TBR because of this! John

    • December 4, 2011 12:14 am

      Thanks Musings, I’m enjoying it. It will be interesting to see hat they decide to do next year – if they decide to do it, what they decide to do, and if they change anything.

  3. December 4, 2011 4:10 am

    Not having read Carpentaria, I have no opinion on the better book, but Gilgamesh is a beautiful novel. Loved it.

    • December 4, 2011 6:07 pm

      Oh have you Fay? I wonder how many Americans would have read this one? I’m glad you like it … I think it’s beautiful too.

  4. December 5, 2011 7:37 pm

    A great way of weighing one book against another and makes for a fascinating read. Meanjin is a great site isn’t it – the design of it makes you want to dip into it

    • December 5, 2011 8:55 pm

      It is I agree, Tom. It was recently revamped and I think they’ve made more of their content free. I think the tournament’s value is the talking about one book versus another though some of the critics have been a bit minimal about it!

  5. December 5, 2011 9:36 pm

    Hmm, I’m a bit dubious about the Zombie concept, especially as now ‘The Children’s Bach’ (two wins and one defeat) is into the final instead of ‘My Brilliant Career’ (3-1). Or is that just my English side coming out (no finals for us, the most points wins the championship!).

    • December 6, 2011 12:15 am

      Oh good one, Tony, I hadn’t done the sums! But, perhaps your sums are a little too simple since each non-Zombie “win” is based on one judge’s opinion whereas the Zombie win means being voted in by a number of readers. But then we might have to start debating the quality of one judge versus the unknown quantity and quality of multiple readers! Too complicated … let’s reconvene when the show is over!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: