Comment (1)

• This is a richly enlightening review by the always rewarding Peter Craven, but am I alone in puzzling over the formulation "privacies in which ... Murnane talks to himself about the reflections of the images and obsessions that constitute his apprehension of his work"? Que? We have M talking to himself (self-reflection), which is okay so far; we have "reflections of the images and obsessions" which, if they are not reflective thoughts about images, is very obscure; we have an ambiguity over whether it is the (already obscure) reflections, or the images and obsessions, which constitute his own apprehension of his work (self-assessment); a translation of the latter section along the lines "the images and obsessions that he essentially takes his work to be" would make some sense of part of it, but the whole sentence resists unravelling and, this said with all respect, I suggest needs re-thinking. Ironically, I have a piece called The Grammar of Gerald Murnane', in Meanjin Spring 2017, where it is Murnane who comes out with a tattered cuff or two rather than his reviewer.
  Posted by John Stephenson

  06 December 2021