Yes, dear Watson, I want to raise some technical points about the Latham diaries, leaving aside the psycho-politico dimensions. Diaries are valuable to historians, primarily for what they index about the times in which they are written. After that, they merely remain traces of one person’s contemporaneous reflections, written for who knows what purpose out of who knows what derangement or not. Disinterested sources are precious, but the status of direct evidence cannot be assumed, only argued. The first question as to status in the Latham case concerns the editing process. How much of Latham’s original contemporaneous diary has been deleted, changed or added to? Is the original open for inspection? Contemporaneous notes have status over remembered notes. And because everyone knows this, the extent of retrospective tampering is material. If significant, the book would be denied the title of ‘diary’ for ‘memoir’. Second, when was the publishing deal struck? Even if the diaries have been produced in full, as written contemporaneously, was this with a contract for commercial publication from the outset? If so, does this publication deserve the title of ‘diary’ in any traditional sense? Otherwise it is a deliberately plotted book on current politics, written contemporaneously but calculatingly, by a guy cashing out every implicit trust given in his life. If designed for publication from the outset, the book could also be denied the title of ‘diary’, in this case for ‘polemic’ or ‘apologia’.
Life, Culture and Politics from BrisVegas
Larvatus Prodeo was an Australian group blog which discussed politics, sociology, culture, life, religion and science from a left of centre perspective. more»
And it seems, too, Chris, cashing out on explicit promises made to his publisher regarding media interviews. As more than one commentator in the media has pointed out over the last few days, everyone is making a buck from this furore – the ABC, News Ltd, MUP, and not least, Latham himself.
Who claimed that he was a little troubled on Lateline last night by selling his story to News. May not be unrelated to the dissing he gives Paul Kelly (who’s picked the right thing to highlight from all the vitriol with the US alliance stuff).
MUP might be the only losers because everyone is probably sick of all this stuff by now. As Peter Ruehl wrote in the Fin today, who wants to curl up in bed with a book about “how everyone crapped on my wonderful life” or whatever.
And the excerpts in the Oz today were boring as batshit. No wonder they’ve brought the publication date forward to Monday to capitalise on all this before it runs out of legs. I doubt having sampled Latho’s “diaries” in the Oz I’ll buy the book.
The questions you raise are extremely good ones – excellent post.
‘Diary’ my lefty arse. I heard enough extracts on Denton – they’re a post-facto rewrite.
I agree Mark – MUP can expect poor sales.
All good historian’s questions, Chris.
I just wrote this in response to a comment from Mark at my joint:
He really is a peculiar and bitter person. I feel sorry for someone that hate-filled to be honest. Gough copped more wrongs than Latham ever did – going way back to the 60s.
Now E.G. might still be combative but he’s not a hater of people. Latham was never fit to be his alleged protege. Never fit to be in parliament, really.
To my mind, his worst comments were about his first wife.
He’s reportedly suing her now, C.L., as well as Bernard Lagan, author of The Loner, which he gave access and interviews for.
Now that his odious past is coming to light, how did he ever become leader?
Peter Ruehl also advised Costello to stick a post it note on his question time folder reminding himself not to harp on this crud for too long.
Note to rog: Costello said it first.
Well if his worst comments were about his first wife, then she’s a piece of work herself judging by her quoted comments in yesterday’s Fairfax press.
And good post c.s. I was wondering that, when in one of the interviews I say (part Denton or all Lateline, too lazy to check) Latham couldn’t remember who ‘Sergeant Schulz’ was (and yeah, the nicknames are banal).
On the possibility that the thing was always intended for publication, Apologia Pro Vita Sua is a better title than “The Latham Diaries” anyway.