Home
Mission
Previous issues
Subscribe
Contact Us

Spring 1999 cover

National Observer Home > No. 42 - Spring 1999 > Book Review

A Short History of Manning Clark

by Stephen Holt

Sydney, Allen & Unwin, 1999, pp. 252 and index.

If Manning Clark had been of a conservative bent, and had written different works of the same degree of scholarship as those he has left, they would undoubtedly have been objects of general scorn, not taken seriously in any quarters.

Because, however, he wrote from a left-wing view-point, and became a fierce defender of Mr. Gough Whitlam and a supporter of a number of Labor Party causes, he has been championed by the left. This has been so despite the evident fictional quality of much of his proferred history ("Australia's Dishonest Historian," was the description by Mr. Paul Johnson) and his inability to escape his own personal psychological problems. Indeed, it is impossible to consider his later work especially without concluding that he was significantly impaired psychologically. His work was not that of a balanced person.

Accordingly it is a balanced assessment that is required of Clark, so that the impartial reader may readily form his own conclusions.

Unfortunately A Short History of Manning Clark does not provide a balanced account. It is perhaps sufficient to quote some of Mr. Holt's comments on the government of Mr. Malcolm Fraser, with key words italicised for emphasis, in order to understand Mr. Holt's position:

"The nation's intelligentsia [presumably, one may infer, Labor-inclined intellectuals?], however, with some exceptions, continued to reject the government's legitimacy even though Whitlam had long since retired. The obdurate conservative minority, needing to show its mettle, was intent on reversing this exasperating imbalance. This required them, whenever the right moment occurred, to target Clark, seen by everyone, whether friend or foe, as a source of extra-parliamentary rage who could easily be mobilised again should another national crisis occur. He was a menace even if he just stuck to history because he insisted on writing, as befitted an Australian of the Year, for the public at large (who voted) rather than for a narrowly specialised academic audience . . .

In the months after October 1981, accordingly, the voice of the mockers was again heard in the land. Volume five attracted a chorus of catcalls from a small but noisy sprinkling of academic ideologues who were disturbed because Clark had dared to reflect on the actions of the Governor-General in 1975 . . ."

It is hence not surprising, although in other contexts it would be indeed remarkable, that significantly the author refers to Clark as "the great man".

In so far as Clark's reputation has survived in some uncritical quarters, it has done so by virtue of the tribalism of the left, an unfortunate phenomenon that has been discussed recently in this Journal. The tribal requirement is that attacks on members of the tribe be defended regardless of their merits. Even where defence is otherwise impossible, it may be maintained by disregarding inconvenient facts and alleging other, untrue facts, as has happened with the late Senator Murphy, for example, who unfortunately remains an icon of the Labor Party despite his criminal associations.

Thus Mr. Holt refers to Clark's critics, who include respectable commentators, as "demonisers", "mockers", "partisan static", "ideologues" and persons involved in "denigration", and so on. It would, of course, have been appropriate for Mr. Holt to adopt an even-handed approach, but his book is polemical, and will be read with satisfaction only by those already convinced of the correctness of his views, that is, broadly, by those of leftist persuasions.

Mr. Holt is not able to omit reference to a number of matters that give cause for much concern in regard to Clark. Mr. Holt asserts that the young Clark was ridiculed at Melbourne Grammar School, as a "child of genteel poverty", and that he "never forgot the very painful experience of these years" (unfortunately Clark was a person who became obsessed by his resentments), became associated with the Left Book Club, "did not appreciate being regarded as an inferior colonial" at Oxford University (again a significant cause of continuing resentments), was the subject of numerous protests against his radical teaching at Geelong Grammar School, was intimately associated with the Soviet spy Ian Milner, described Lenin as "Christ-like, at least in his compassion" and hailed Lenin as "a son of enlightenment" who devoted himself to propagating a selfless doctrine, was the subject of adverse assessments by A.S.I.O. and associated persistently with communists and communist-front organisations, had a wife who was specially employed in the Russian embassy, made a number of visits to Russia (about which he wrote with remarkable sympathy) and was subject to much controversy as to whether he was a Russian agent of influence etc.

Clark's personal psychological difficulties and his radical political views were a dangerous combination. His A History of Australia was calculated to provide grotesquely inaccurate views reflecting his own resentments and prejudices. His irrationality can be traced back to the hatreds that were developed in his formative years.

Unfortunately Mr. Holt's biography, the subject of this review, represents a polemical attempt to justify Clark, and it is not to be recommended.

I. C. F. Spry

National Observer No. 42 - Spring 1999