
Katharine in 1941
Katharine Susannah Prichard, fifty years dead today.
Auden wrote of Yeats’ death, ‘The current of his feeling failed; he became his admirers’. But it’s also the fate of the dead author to become their detractors as well as their admirers, or perhaps to be forgotten altogether. Katharine hasn’t been forgotten altogether; she has a handful of books in print – more than most dead Australian authors; she is venerated at the writers’ centre which meets in her old home; and she is recognised as a significant writer by scholars. Yet it’s ironic to find her remarking how sorry she is for Miles Franklin dying without due recognition in 1954 when Franklin has fared much better posthumously than Katharine.
She wrote to fellow communist Vic Williams ‘If only, in the time to come, my works will have helped people to realise the future they can create for this country of my own, I will be satisfied.’ She’d be horrified at what the country has become – communism has died, inequality has widened, greed and materialism have taken over. We have not given up on the madness of war or exploitation.
Soon after Katharine’s death, a brutal obituary appeared in Overland from Dorothy Hewett. Hewett had grown disillusioned with communism and, by extension, with Katharine for her unswerving loyalty to the Soviet Union and to the effect Hewett felt it had on her writing. ‘In the clash between the artist’s pagan and poetic sensibilities… and the moralising Marxist religieuse, it is the latter who finally wins the battle.’ If the obituary has elements of truth in it, it is ungenerous and reflects Hewett’s own issues as much as Prichard’s.
The letters in the archives show that the obituary made Katharine’s son, Ric Throssell, so angry he decided he would write a biography of her. Published in 1975, Wild Weeds and Windflowers shows some of the defensiveness of its origins. Yet I was surprised to encounter a note by Ric in his papers from an interview he conducted with Hewett to gain her perspective on his mother. It reveals he was dreading the interview but came away charmed and having been glad he spoke to her. The original enmity had faded; Hewett was to go on to write a generous and appreciative tribute to Katharine on her centenary in 1983 – ‘Happy birthday, Brave Red Witch’.
Posthumously, Katharine’s novel Coonardoo (1929) continued to be her best known work and came to be seen as part of the Australian literary canon, included in high school and university curriculums. It was praised for what was considered its progressive depiction of Aboriginal people and its concern with injustices against them. This success has caused its current problems, as Aboriginal scholars like Jeanine Leane and others have argued that its racial stereotypes which are now ninety years old have been perpetuated through its simplistic teaching as an ‘Aboriginal’ novel.
Meanwhile, the Cold War is over, and communism is not quite the dirty word it used to be. Yet Katharine has been dogged by the claim by Desmond Ball and David Horner in their 1998 book Breaking the Codes that she was a Soviet spy. I’m yet to finish my research into this, but I’m not convinced by the evidence they provide. It’s the sort of accusation that sticks, though, and the columnists for The Australian seem to mention it quite often.
Katharine’s work is diverse enough that there’s scope for a continuing readership. The dark circus drama through the backblocks of Australia in Haxby’s Circus; the beautiful evocation of the karri forests around Pemberton in Working Bullocks – if only it was in print; love affairs on the beaches of Perth in Intimate Strangers. Her quite superb short stories. I could go on and on.
Of course, I think her life is her most interesting story of all. It has everything – multiple tragedies, romance, war and revolution, and a determined spirit in an often frail body. I will finish my biography before too long, and I hope it will stimulate renewed interest in both her life and work.
MF is better known but there is absolutely no doubt that KSP’s writing is better regarded. I can’t imagine I’ll ever persuade many people to read even My Career Goes Bung let alone the Brent of Bin Bin books.
LikeLiked by 1 person
But you only need one classic, right? And MF has that in spades.
LikeLike
Yes, that’s true that you only need one classic, but I’m sure there are others like me who were most grievously disappointed to discover that the rest of MF’s writing is painful, to say the least. (I admit that I haven’t read many of them, I won’t spend more time on more disappointments to abandon with a rueful frown.) I love MF, I love her passionate devotion to the cause of Australian writing and her determination to see it flourish by setting up the bequest that bears her name. I read Jill Roe’s bio with awe for the story of MF’s amazing life and I don’t like the way her legacy has been hijacked in recent years. But the classic is best read when a teenager, and the rest of it has curiosity value only IMO. It seems to me that MF has endured because of the prize, not because of her writing.
I agree with Bill that KSP’s writing is infinitely more significant. I’ve only read two of her novels so far but they were a pleasure to read and they are novels of social conscience. Let The Australian say what it will, anyone with an IQ over 35 knows that that paper’s agenda extends even to its review pages and if they read it, they do so with antennae on full alert. Anything they have to say about KSP is warped by their ideology and is not worth bothering about.
Capitalism is failing. I grew up in what is now called The Welfare State, in a ‘mixed economy’ designed to domesticate communism so that western democracies wouldn’t want the soviet experiment because they had the best of both worlds. It wasn’t perfect, but neither was communism, and it was infinitely better than what we have now. KSP’s novels about working people show us what lies ahead if we don’t change.
LikeLiked by 1 person
What a superb comment Lisa, says more than most blog posts. I’m fascinated by your and Bill’s opinion on MF v KSP. I’ve only read My Brilliant Career and MF’s letters; I’m not going to be in too much of a rush with the others on my shelf now.
As a social democrat I agree so strongly with your comment on the mixed economy. A system which functioned pretty well was hijacked by both major parties to serve the privatisation and low tax agenda of neoliberal extremism. We’re paying for it now, and the cost is only rising.
And as for The Australian… it has much to answer for.
LikeLiked by 1 person
I had this post marked to read as soon as I got time and I gave myself a great laugh when I read it the early hours of this morning, still groggy with dreams. When reading the passage ‘ . . . and the columnists for The Australian seem to mention it quite often’, my brain addled one word so I read ‘the communists for The Australian’ which made me laugh so hard I spat out my coffee.
Seriously, this is a great post about an author who deserves a brighter spotlight. Let’s hope your biography shines that light on her life and work.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Karenlee. Those commies who work for The Australian are keeping a rather low profile!
LikeLike
This is a fascinating post, Nathan. Thank you. I’m looking forward to reading Haxby’s Circus soon, and also to the biography in due course.
I wonder if some of Prichard’s out of print books might be published as Text Classics at some point.
LikeLike