Take a photo of a barcode or cover
mediaevalmuse 's review for:
True History of the Kelly Gang
by Peter Carey
I saw this book on a list of best historical fiction and thought it would be a nice deviation from my usual reads. I know very little about the history of Australia, so I figured this would probably prompt me to go learn more. I did learn a fair amount, but even so, I can't say I was overly impressed by this novel. Though I respect what it was trying to do and the way in which it was written, I ultimately felt like the narrative progressed unevenly, so for that reason, this book gets 3 stars from me.
WRITING: Carey's prose is interesting but admittedly a little hard to read. It is meant to mimic the dialect and education level of a poor criminal, so there are a lot of run-on sentences and abbreviations, as well as a lack of punctuation (mostly commas and quotation marks). While I appreciate the intention, I do think the style made it harder for me to sink into the story, and at times, I was unsure of exactly what was going on.
There were also little things that bothered me but were probably stylistic choices rather than missteps. For one, Carey repeats the word "adjectival" a lot - no doubt as a stand in for a curse word. Still, the repetition was distracting. Carey also chooses to include the n-word without censorship, and while I know it's an imitation of 19th century racism and writing style, I couldn't help but be deeply uncomfortable.
PLOT: The plot of this book basically recounts the life of Ned Kelly from birth to age 25 (when he is executed). Ned Kelly is historically a famous bushranger who lived in 19th century Australia and is akin to a Robin Hood figure, and Carey's story seeks to recount his life and crimes from the perspective of Kelly writing to his daughter.
I really enjoyed the subject of this book and the way Carey showcased the desperation and poverty of 19th century Australian life. Characters would struggle over and over again to try to get to a place of stability, but because of the corrupt politics and so-called "Squattocracy," it was near impossible for people to make an honest living. I think Carey did a good job capturing that desperation and the unrelenting hardship, and by the end, I was fully sympathetic to Kelly's causes.
I also think Carey did a good job constructing a strong relationship between Kelly and his mother. Kelly is incredibly protective of his mother and the two remain devoted to one another, even when things get rocky. I liked that Kelly struggled with the fact that his mother kept allowing horrible men into her life but forbid her son from interfering. It made the relationship more interesting and the question of survival more complex, and it seemed to me that Kelly's love for his mother was the only unshakeable thing about this book.
I also saw a lot of value in avoiding a lot of courtroom or violent scenes. Carey is not interested in writing out a dramatic trial or detailing the day to day experience of a 3 years hard labor sentence; though Kelly is jailed a few times, he never describes what the experience of a trial or a long stint in prison is like. There is always a time skip so the focus remains on his life as a farmer or as a bushranger. Part of me thinks this is an interesting way for Carey to make Kelly feel more real (less mythical), and I'm glad we don't dwell on things that have a tendency to be dramatized for shock value. But another part of me has to admit that it made for some really tedious scenes, and some parts of the book felt a little slow.
But my main critique has to do with the racism, sexism, and anti-cross-dressing attitudes (which elicit some homophobia). Though I understand that 19th century attitudes towards non-white people, queer people, and women in general weren't the best, most of the -isms in this book felt random or inserted for some gritty sense of historical accuracy. Intellectually, I understand that these moments serve a purpose, but they did dampen my enjoyment of this book. They didn't feel like they were inserted as a strong critique of white settler colonialism, and besides, I can't quite figure out what Carey is trying to do with masculinity in this novel. Maybe I have to think about it a little more, but for the time being, let's just say that it all feels icky.
CHARACTERS: There are a lot of characters in this book so I'll only discuss our narrator (Ned Kelly).
Carey's Ned Kelly is made out to be a sympathetic do-gooder whose only goal is to live in peace and make enough money on his farm to live a quiet life. Despite all his criminal activity, Kelly has a fairly strong sense of honor and seems to be one of the only men who has a problem with women being treated poorly (particularly his mother). As a result, he did feel like he was an honest man who just got dragged into conflict against his will.
I'm not entirely sure if we're meant to read Kelly as 100% sympathetic or if the idealistic portrait is supposed to prompt us to view him as an unreliable narrator. Maybe this ambiguity is good because it makes us think a little more about the narrative, but if I'm honest, I wasn't very interested in figuring out if Kelly was lying. Personally, the idealism made Kelly feel a little dull, and I wanted him to either have a little more grey morality or for the unreliableness to be pushed a bit more.
TL;DR: True History of the Kelly Gang is admirable for the way it seeks to capture the voice of an iconic historical figure while also demystifying his struggle with law enforcement. However, the racism, sexism, and homophobia combined with some tedious pacing prevented this book from being wholly enjoyable.
WRITING: Carey's prose is interesting but admittedly a little hard to read. It is meant to mimic the dialect and education level of a poor criminal, so there are a lot of run-on sentences and abbreviations, as well as a lack of punctuation (mostly commas and quotation marks). While I appreciate the intention, I do think the style made it harder for me to sink into the story, and at times, I was unsure of exactly what was going on.
There were also little things that bothered me but were probably stylistic choices rather than missteps. For one, Carey repeats the word "adjectival" a lot - no doubt as a stand in for a curse word. Still, the repetition was distracting. Carey also chooses to include the n-word without censorship, and while I know it's an imitation of 19th century racism and writing style, I couldn't help but be deeply uncomfortable.
PLOT: The plot of this book basically recounts the life of Ned Kelly from birth to age 25 (when he is executed). Ned Kelly is historically a famous bushranger who lived in 19th century Australia and is akin to a Robin Hood figure, and Carey's story seeks to recount his life and crimes from the perspective of Kelly writing to his daughter.
I really enjoyed the subject of this book and the way Carey showcased the desperation and poverty of 19th century Australian life. Characters would struggle over and over again to try to get to a place of stability, but because of the corrupt politics and so-called "Squattocracy," it was near impossible for people to make an honest living. I think Carey did a good job capturing that desperation and the unrelenting hardship, and by the end, I was fully sympathetic to Kelly's causes.
I also think Carey did a good job constructing a strong relationship between Kelly and his mother. Kelly is incredibly protective of his mother and the two remain devoted to one another, even when things get rocky. I liked that Kelly struggled with the fact that his mother kept allowing horrible men into her life but forbid her son from interfering. It made the relationship more interesting and the question of survival more complex, and it seemed to me that Kelly's love for his mother was the only unshakeable thing about this book.
I also saw a lot of value in avoiding a lot of courtroom or violent scenes. Carey is not interested in writing out a dramatic trial or detailing the day to day experience of a 3 years hard labor sentence; though Kelly is jailed a few times, he never describes what the experience of a trial or a long stint in prison is like. There is always a time skip so the focus remains on his life as a farmer or as a bushranger. Part of me thinks this is an interesting way for Carey to make Kelly feel more real (less mythical), and I'm glad we don't dwell on things that have a tendency to be dramatized for shock value. But another part of me has to admit that it made for some really tedious scenes, and some parts of the book felt a little slow.
But my main critique has to do with the racism, sexism, and anti-cross-dressing attitudes (which elicit some homophobia). Though I understand that 19th century attitudes towards non-white people, queer people, and women in general weren't the best, most of the -isms in this book felt random or inserted for some gritty sense of historical accuracy. Intellectually, I understand that these moments serve a purpose, but they did dampen my enjoyment of this book. They didn't feel like they were inserted as a strong critique of white settler colonialism, and besides, I can't quite figure out what Carey is trying to do with masculinity in this novel. Maybe I have to think about it a little more, but for the time being, let's just say that it all feels icky.
CHARACTERS: There are a lot of characters in this book so I'll only discuss our narrator (Ned Kelly).
Carey's Ned Kelly is made out to be a sympathetic do-gooder whose only goal is to live in peace and make enough money on his farm to live a quiet life. Despite all his criminal activity, Kelly has a fairly strong sense of honor and seems to be one of the only men who has a problem with women being treated poorly (particularly his mother). As a result, he did feel like he was an honest man who just got dragged into conflict against his will.
I'm not entirely sure if we're meant to read Kelly as 100% sympathetic or if the idealistic portrait is supposed to prompt us to view him as an unreliable narrator. Maybe this ambiguity is good because it makes us think a little more about the narrative, but if I'm honest, I wasn't very interested in figuring out if Kelly was lying. Personally, the idealism made Kelly feel a little dull, and I wanted him to either have a little more grey morality or for the unreliableness to be pushed a bit more.
TL;DR: True History of the Kelly Gang is admirable for the way it seeks to capture the voice of an iconic historical figure while also demystifying his struggle with law enforcement. However, the racism, sexism, and homophobia combined with some tedious pacing prevented this book from being wholly enjoyable.