With the exception of Mark Latham’s Diaries, few books on Australian politics hit the best seller list these days. Whether that’s a sign of the anodyne and airbrushed nature of political personalities Latho himself took aim at is, I guess, a matter for speculation. Perhaps it’s because the insider horse race stuff really does have a very limited audience outside those who see themselves as Insiders. But in the promotional stakes, now, it seems, forthcoming books are mined for whatever juicy tidbits (or otherwise) might actually influence the insider horse race, or at least get Insiders excited. Typically, there’s a fair bit of astroturf going on here, with rival newspaper chains Fairfax and News contending for serialisation rights and trying to extract “news” value from touting otherwise tedious memoirs or turgid accounts of political history.
Peter Costello’s forthcoming tome is being talked down by the News Limited punditariat as likely to be “boring”. In other words, he supposedly won’t be tipping a petulant bucket on John Howard, according to “insiders”. This – for the News Limited opposition cheer squad – is good news because it means that their quixotic and probably doomed quest to install Costello in the Liberal leadership can proceed. It’ll be interesting to see how the Fairfax papers – which have the serialisation rights – play the book, which in any case won’t be released for yonks.
One that will be released soon is Peter Van Onselen and Phillip Senior’s Howard’s End (the ghost of E.M. Forster should sue).
PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd is a foul-mouthed MP who launches into expletive-ridden rants in his office when things go wrong, an explosive new book, Howard’s End, claims.
Trevor Cook comments:
Explosive it ain’t if that’s the best that media tart Peter van Onselen can come up with.
Cook takes a scathing look at Van Onselen’s own record as a pundit, and concludes that this is all self-serving twaddle from a disconnected media and the political class.
Word.
And the Harpies of Obvious Book Titles should torment him for all eternity and cause much gnashing of teeth.
Wasn’t that the name of that Four Corners episode after the election?
“(the ghost of E.M. Forster should sue).”
GHOST (to his lawyer): Plagiarism most foul,
As in the best it is…
Actually isn’t it more like, Forsterisms have just become fodder for workaday literary allusions? Heck, people have been making dull “Howards End” jokes at least since the days of the later, disappointing films of the Three Stooges. One can imagine that JH could have plausibly compiled a rather full scrapbook of this ready-to-hand joke, spanning his entire career.
btw, by sticking that apostrophe in there, does the book mean by “Howard’s End” the sunset of his career, or his “end” in the sense of purpose or goal?
just bein’ difficult…
Many thanks to Peter Cook for calling out Peter van Onselen for the airheaded media tart he is. Psephologically speaking, van Onselen is a standing joke, and for a political scientist his grasp of the dark arts is naive to say the least. But he is a conveniently placed broadcaster of Liberal Party gossip from the West, and he looks quite nice on the telly.
“… expletive-ridden rants in his office when things go wrong …”
Sounds like me when the server is down again.
The puerile depths to which the MSM is sinking in its attempts to find something controversial to write about Labor have moved beyond pathetic to straight out irrationality. I guess it’s all part of the madness that afflicts any institution in its death throes.
Yes, there is nothing like a foul-mouthed explosive rant at the staff when something doesn’t go my way. Changes the colour of my day!
Actually this whole bad temper/intemperate language thing is a great example of how the media can present exactly the same behaviour in vastly different lights, according to its underlying intentions.
I seem to recall that in the case of Kerry Packer, ‘expletive-ridden rants in his office when things go wrong’ were just an indication of lovable rogueishness.
Reading the Mark Latham Diaries and comparing my impression of their contents with the media narrative that was constructed (before they were even published) and stuck to was quite illuminating. I thought Latham poured a welcome and insightful bucket of shit over the Canberra press gallery, as well as over the inner machinations of the ALP. Really lifted the veil and did a great public service. Confirmed a few of my suspicions about how it all works. And a helluva lot more interesting read than Steve Waugh’s diary.
All the insiders didn’t want anyone to know about this so closed ranks and pretended he was a loonie. Even Crikey was in on it which was disappointing.
I seem to recall that in the case of Kerry Packer, ‘expletive-ridden rants in his office when things go wrong’ were just an indication of lovable rogueishness.
Yeah, and Bolt likes to portray it as “passion” when a conservative does it. Remember that post about Gordon Ramsey (and the F word) and how Bolt managed to accuse some places run entirely by families of “collectivist” mentality as the sole reason for their failure rather than just plain shitty management.
I wonder if he’ll play it the same way for Rudd and his apparent potty mouthedness at work.
Oh I do enjoy it when the Fairfax broadsheets and the “Oz” snipe at each other, relay gossip from the other crowd, etc. Akin to the occasional outbreak of sharpness between “Today’s Night” and “Current Affairs”.
So, even behind the protection of a political memoir Tip is a gutless wonder. What a surprise.
As for Rudd swearing in the office, you should hear me when one of my more idiotic users requests something that is both of no value and not technically feasible.
Kim, I think I heard in passing that Costello’s book is due out in September. This is unreliable and confirmation if someone can would be good.
As I said on another thread, give me a foul-mouthed leader who tells the truth anyday, unlike his lying predecessor.
What intrigues me about this, but doesn’t surprise me is the MSM’s decision to emphasise Mr. Rudd’s Bad Language. Surely many things much more interesting happened once Rudd assumed leadership of the ALP.
I, for one, would really like to know how Howard reacted once he realised he’d lost the election and his seat on the night? Did he swear, rant, break down in tears, blame Lady Muck of Goat Island, attemnpt suicide, etc, etc. The possibilities are endless and I really want to know.
I reckon a bit of swearin’ and a bad temper make ‘im a bit more yuman. Now we know he likes the strippers and swears like a trooper, if we find out he likes a bet on the Dapto dogs on Friday night with too many stubbies under his belt, I’ll vote for him 4 evah! Best not get him sending piccies of her indoors into Picture magazine home girls though.
Dogs are from Wentworth Park and Richmond on Friday nights.
‘k’n oath, Ute Person
Growler wrote:
F*ck, that’s why I keep losin’.
wilful: I also enjoyed that aspect of Latham’s diaries (which were bowdlerized pretty heavily by lawyers, it was reported), although the malignant narcissism started to get me down a bit.
Not that malignant narcissism ever stopped a successful Prime Ministership. My recollection was that Crikey (at least in the form of Mayne) thought the Diaries, for what they revealed about the Press Gallery and machinations of the ALP, were a valuable work. Though that didn’t stop them happily joining in the “Latham is insane” message that everyone else with a stake in it was desperately pushing, from Matt Price downwards. Now I miss Matt and his writing in The OO as much as anyone, but boy did he cop a bucketing from Iron Mark in the Diaries.
So if Tip isn’t going to embark on a 400+ page hissy fit about how all the nasty things J-Ho did to him why would anyone buy it? The only thing left is self-aggrandizing smugness from a Coodabeen Champion – I’ve just recovered from 11+ years of that, and I’m not going to pay for more!
OH,
Dolly is the one that has the hissy fits.
But you’re right -if he’s not going to dump on Howard big time, what’s the point of buying anything Costello churns out?
Many thanks Pettigrew, at al.
My problems with van Onselem continue beyond Christian Kerr, Jennifer Marohasy and George “populate or perish” Pell, even to Planet Janet and Blot.
Arrogant, vapid, vaccuus; the pea rattles at the bare thought.
Grrrrr!!
Paul Burns,
If Peter Coleman is assisting $weetie, and if Peter Cloeman was accurately quoted just after $weetie’s November dummy-spit, then there’ll be plenty of meat with the potatoes in their book. And Mr Coleman probably has plenty of NSW Liberal Party info about J-Ho. Wait & see.
In basing his prediction on 56-44 poll results, Trevor Cook proved as far off the mark as Peter van Onselen and the rest. He just happened to err in the right direction.