Helen Garner and me

So I’m reading an article about Helen Garner in the Weekend Oz magazine.

It’s an excerpt from a new book about her, called A Writing Life: Helen Garner and Her Work by Bernadette Brennan.

Then I read this:

[After discarding a third draft of the Farquharson book] Garner once again contemplated dropping the whole project but she could not break free. Then, in February 2012, she received a letter from a police officer’s wife. In part it read: “The issue of why men kill their children is enormously important… Your book will also be read by people like my husband, the police detective, who may gain an insight that will help him deal with the issue on a professional level. Or at least gain a sense that his own bewilderment is shared.”

I wrote that letter!!!! To say thank you after attending one of Helen’s writing classes (during which she spoke about struggling with the Farquharson book).

OMG.

I’m shocked and kind of thrilled all at once.

To keep it in perspective, Helen Garner subsequently contacted me after I sent that letter. I was super excited, until it became clear that she wanted to take my HUSBAND out for a coffee. Not me. Sigh. He went, had a nice chat with HG and now teases me about HIS friend Helen Garner. C’est la vie.

2018-03-24T01:29:54+00:00 March 26th, 2017|Writing|17 Comments

17 Comments

  1. wadholloway March 26, 2017 at 3:55 pm - Reply

    Never mind, you can have a drink with your fellow writer Garner at the publisher’s christmas party. As to the bigger issue: I think children are too often just collateral damage when husbands and wives focus their anger on each other.

    • Michelle Scott Tucker March 26, 2017 at 4:09 pm - Reply

      Children as collateral damage? Maybe, but I fear the patriarchy ensures that some fathers see children as ‘belonging’ to the mother (rather than to them both, as parents). Therefore, deliberately hurt the children = hurt the mother x infinity.

  2. Winter March 26, 2017 at 9:31 pm - Reply

    It was breakfast, not coffee. Just saying.

  3. whisperinggums March 26, 2017 at 9:57 pm - Reply

    Oh, good for you Michelle for writing that letter. I think both you and Bill are right. I think sometimes it’s a case of getting at the mother through the children (but that also makes them collateral damage, doesn’t it?). I think also that they tend to see their wives/partners and children as their possessions, and there’s a whole complicated set of behaviours that can stem from that.

    • Michelle Scott Tucker March 27, 2017 at 9:52 am - Reply

      Thanks Sue – I’m glad I wrote that letter too!
      To be clear about my views about children as ‘collateral damage’, I don’t think they are. It is my understanding that many family violence perpetrators use deliberate controlling behaviour towards all family members. The children are part of the equation when the perpetrator makes the decision to inflict harm and indeed often an integral part of the perpetrator’s plan to inflict violence. I fear even the phrase ‘collateral damage’ implies absolving the perpetrator of responsibility for inflicting harm on the children (even when they are ‘only’ witnesses to violence). It seems the legislators agree: in the past I’ve looked up the actual family violence legislation and was surprised by how much it encompasses.

      • whisperinggums March 28, 2017 at 7:50 am - Reply

        Ah yes Michelle, I see what you’re saying. I hadn’t thought of them as “collateral damage” before, but Bill’s comment made sense. However, by your description and definition I can see theyre not. Then again, that makes me think that “collateral damage” isn’t really correct in other places it’s used either.

        • Michelle Scott Tucker March 28, 2017 at 11:52 am

          You are right, of course. Isn’t ‘collateral damage’ a term originally used by the military? Even to describe civilian casualties? Perhaps that’s reason enough to avoid it!

        • whisperinggums March 28, 2017 at 11:56 am

          Yes, I think it was – and was thinking by your definition they are not “really” collateral.

  4. Gail Rehbein March 27, 2017 at 8:45 am - Reply

    I love this story Michelle. If not for this article, you might never have known the influence your letter had. It’s a wonderful confirmation of the power of words, of community … and of following your inspiration!

    • Michelle Scott Tucker March 27, 2017 at 9:39 am - Reply

      Thanks Gail – I also think it’s an encouragement to us all to write more thank you letters!

  5. learnearnandreturn March 27, 2017 at 9:48 am - Reply

    A great story – and put it in perspective. If John Macarthur had written to you, you would have written straight back to ask if you could take HIS WIFE out to breakfast!

  6. Brona March 29, 2017 at 9:41 am - Reply

    That is the best story (about a tragic story) that highlights the power of connection. As B19’s girlfriend would say, ‘that gives me good feels’!

  7. Tathra Street April 4, 2017 at 3:19 pm - Reply

    How exciting! Just goes to show the value of giving feedback.

  8. […] in Biography is a Garner fan and has posts on Garner’s This House of Grief (here and here) Sue at Whispering Gums must be a fan too. A list of her Garner posts (here) Lisa at ANZLitLovers […]

Leave a comment, I'd love to hear from you...

%d bloggers like this: