Jump to content

Cloudstreet by Tim Winton


Recommended Posts

Welcome to the July 2012 Reading Circle. The theme for this month was AUSTRALIAN FICTION and the chosen book was CLOUDSTREET by Tim Winton

 

It is assumed that you have read the book before reading posts in this thread, as the discussion might give away crucial points, and the continuous use of spoiler tags might hinder fluent reading of posts.

 

CLOUDSTREET by Tim Winton

Synopsis (from the back cover):

Hailed as a classic, Tim Winton's masterful family saga is both a paean to working-class Australians and an unflinching examination of the human heart's capacity for sorrow, joy, and endless gradations in between. An award-winning work, "Cloudstreet" exemplifies the brilliant ability of fiction to captivate and inspire.

 

Struggling to rebuild their lives after being touched by disaster, the Pickle family, who've inherited a big house called Cloudstreet in a suburb of Perth, take in the God-fearing Lambs as tenants. The Lambs have suffered their own catastrophes, and determined to survive, they open up a grocery on the ground floor. From 1944 to 1964, the shared experiences of the two overpopulated clans - running the gamut from drunkenness, adultery, and death to resurrection, marriage, and birth - bond them to each other and to the bustling, haunted house in ways no one could have anticipated.

 

Questions for discussion (please answer as many or as few as you wish):

 

1. Who was your favourite character?

 

2. ... and your least favourite?

 

3. Was there a particular part you enjoyed more than the rest?

 

4. Was this the first book you've read by this author and has it encouraged you to read more?

 

5. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with?

 

6. How did you feel about the Western Australian colloquial and slang words? Did they add flavour to the writing or did they distract you from the story?

 

7. Were you engaged immediately with the story, or did it take you a while to get into it?

 

8. Overall, was reading the book an enjoyable experience?

 

9. If you enjoyed the book, would you have liked a sequel? How do you think the story could develop in the sequel?

 

10. Would you recommend the book to others?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Who was your favourite character?

A tricky question to start off with! I loved so many of the characters, and I can't chose between Rose and Quick. The both felt like real people to me, and both struggled with depression which manifested itself in different ways, but both found a way to heal themselves and live.

 

2. ... and your least favourite?

Although I didn't dislike her, Dolly was a someone I found difficult to find sympathy with. It seemed to me as though she was her own worst enemy and just couldn't seem to rise above the situation she let herself get into. It did feel at the end as though she might finally have a chance to redeem herself and actually move on with her life as part of the extended family.

 

3. Was there a particular part you enjoyed more than the rest?

I loved when Rose got her first job. It was the like a new start in life for her, and I was so relieved when she started to eat again. My feeling was that she had stopped eating as she could see nothing good in her future and therefore there was no point in trying to keep her body going and wanted to disappear and become invisible, and suddenly she had the possibility of a future making her take an interest in living again.

 

4. Was this the first book you've read by this author and has it encouraged you to read more?

I've read one other book by Tim Winton called Breath, which was more contemporary novel, and actually very different in tone and a much smaller, compact story, but was also enjoyable, and I will definitely be reading more of his books in future.

 

5. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with?

The only thing that wasn't to my liking, was the idea of an otherworldly presence of Fish, as if his soul had been split by the near death experience, and his intelligent consciousness was waiting to be reunited with his physical body to become a complete soul again after death.

 

6. How did you feel about the Western Australian colloquial and slang words? Did they add flavour to the writing or did they distract you from the story?

I absolutely thought they added to the colour of the story, and I even made a glossary for myself so that I could remember them. And, because they were often specifically WA words, they gave it much more a sense of place within that vast nation.

 

7. Were you engaged immediately with the story, or did it take you a while to get into it?

There is an anonymity of the short prologue acting as a gentle introduction and then chapter one drops you straight in to the Pickles family life, and I was completely drawn in from there.

 

8. Overall, was reading the book an enjoyable experience?

Absolutely! I loved this book a lot, and thought it was a great choice for a discussion.

 

9. If you enjoyed the book, would you have liked a sequel? How do you think the story could develop in the sequel?

As with any family saga, there is always scope to continue the story into a sequel, as you could develop the story with either a focus on some of the more minor characters from this story, or with future generations of the family, but I have to say, I don't think I would want to see that from this book. I'm happy with the development of the characters in this book, and there is a hopeful, optimistic feel to the end of the book, and I was satisfied with that feeling as a conclusion to the two families stories.

 

10. Would you recommend the book to others?

Yes! In fact, I already have. One of the people at my reading group has recently visited Australia and has been immersing herself in Australian fiction, but she hadn't come across this book yet, so I heartily recommended it to her.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Who was your favourite character?

 

Rose Pickle. I liked her vulnerability and in a way you almost see more of her thoughts and feelings than the other characters. It was good to see how she changed over time, and I think she is the most altered character in the story from beginning to end. Oriel Lamb follows closely for her gruff caring manner and her ‘just get on with it’ attitude.

 

 

2. ... and your least favourite?

 

Probably Dolly, for her treatment of her family. I suppose it’s somewhat explained in the end, but it doesn’t really cut it for me.

 

3. Was there a particular part you enjoyed more than the rest?

 

I liked Quick's adventures when he had left home. I just thought it was an interesting time that he had, and it was good to see him as a character on his own instead of just one of the many colorful members of his family.

 

4. Was this the first book you've read by this author and has it encouraged you to read more?

 

Yes, and I suppose I would read more, but it lacked something for me, not sure what yet. I suppose that it was peppered by a bit of weirdness, and I didn't know where that fitted in. If his other books are similar, it would be hard to read them back to back. They are very complex and I think time is needed to digest them to appreciate them.

 

5. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with?

 

For a great deal of the book I was sure Fish was faking, so I kept waiting for that to be revealed. Then towards the end the idea that the whole book had been told in the split second before Fish died, I thought that was a little bit odd. In fact I flipped back to the beginning, because there was a picnic at the start as well, and I thought maybe the whole story was Fish’s imagination when he was trying to be revived. Obviously it wasn’t as Rose was there with her baby at the second picnic.

 

I also didn’t quite get the Aborigine and his connection to the house. Also, what was with Quick glowing in the dark? Any ideas?
:huh:

 

6. How did you feel about the Western Australian colloquial and slang words? Did they add flavour to the writing or did they distract you from the story?

 

No, I thought it was fine. It gave it an authenticity, and I think when you read a book written in another country there will always be parts that you don’t immediately grasp.

 

 

7. Were you engaged immediately with the story, or did it take you a while to get into it?

 

I was engaged pretty much immediately, with the two tragedies happening in the first chapter (or couple of chapters – I can’t remember) - it was a good attention getter.

 

8. Overall, was reading the book an enjoyable experience?

 

Yes, but it was different from what I expected. I was expecting a linear story, sort of heading towards an end-point, but I found it meandered a bit, though I don’t mean that as a criticism. It's just that I had expectations before I started (never a good thing, really!), and it threw me that the book was different from that.

 

 

9. If you enjoyed the book, would you have liked a sequel? How do you think the story could develop in the sequel?

 

I don’t really think a sequel would work. I think each of the characters had their story to tell or their experience to pass on, and they did that this book. A sequel would just follow the rest of their lives, but I think the pivotal moments happened in the book, and a sequel would just be a 'nice story' without too much happening (aside from the usual day-to-day).

 

10. Would you recommend the book to others?

 

Yes, as it is an interesting and well-told story. There are a multitude of characters and I’m sure everyone will be able to relate to at least one of them on some level.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. Was there a particular part you enjoyed more than the rest?

I liked Quick's adventures when he had left home. I just thought it was an interesting time that he had, and it was good to see him as a character on his own instead of just one of the many colorful members of his family.

 

This would have been my second choice! I loved that part too, and it gave you another view of Australia out on the farmland.

 

4. Was this the first book you've read by this author and has it encouraged you to read more?

Yes, and I suppose I would read more, but it lacked something for me, not sure what yet. I suppose that it was peppered by a bit of weirdness, and I didn't know where that fitted in. If his other books are similar, it would be hard to read them back to back. They are very complex and I think time is needed to digest them to appreciate them.

I've only read one other by Winton, Breath which is a more traditional style of story, and I think you'd find it an a less complex read.

 

5. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with?

For a great deal of the book I was sure Fish was faking, so I kept waiting for that to be revealed.

I wondered the same thing initially, and it was quite a while before I convinced myself otherwise.

 

I also didn’t quite get the Aborigine and his connection to the house. Also, what was with Quick glowing in the dark? Any ideas?
:huh:

No, that was one thing that puzzled me too. Hopefully, someone else will have some ideas!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

chesilbeach, I remember reading a post of yours - a list of unknown Aussie words in the book, and their meaning - can't find it now though.

Could you please send me the link?

 

Thank you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi bree, they were in my reading blog, but I'll copy them here to make it easier :smile2:

 

Akubra - the brand name of a type of hat

grousest - coolest/most awesome

chiack - to taunt or tease in jest

snags - sausages

jarrah - a type of wood

gilgies - the Noongar name for a small freshwater crayfish of the South West

Aquadhere - brand name of a type of glue

Carn - short for "come on"

"it's as yeller as Tojo" - reference to Japanese Prime Minister during WW2?

polony - type of processed meat (looks a bit like Spam?)

hosco - ??? No idea!

mallee - a type of woody shrub like eucalyptus

Edited by chesilbeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you :friends3:

I'd figured out carn, chiack and grousest, not bad huh? :cool:

I especially love carn, and may actually start using it. :giggle2:

 

I'll go complete that book now :readingtwo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a set of thought-provoking questions chesilbeach! I may have to think through some of them a bit more - will answer a few now...

 

 

1. Who was your favourite character?

Of course Red Lamb - for her singularly spectacular way of chasing away peeping-toms : "Death to pervs" :giggle:

 

No, actually it is her father - Lester Lamb.

As much as I loved Quick and Rose - I was more drawn in by the characters of the older set of people who didn't have youth and life on their side.

Lester Lamb was a "fool", in his wife's words - and he was the first one to admit it too. He was full of music, eternal hope - sensitive to his children - vulnerable - full of love, gentleness and an endearing way of accepting everyone in his life for who they were, and being grateful.

Despite all the misery that came his way, he still chose to call them : "miracles you don't want" and I thought that was a startling contrast to the "shifty shadow" and "hairy hand of god" that the Pickleses used to refer to bad luck.

Yes Lester Lamb was weak, he wasn't half the man that Oriel was, but he was full of a compassion, had a touching naivety about him, and I think an essentially good soul.

 

My other favourite character was Oriel - rather one-dimensional at first - and then slowly the complex layers were exposed. She was to me the most interesting character in the book.

 

2. ... and your least favourite?

I didn't have a least favourite. Yes, Dolly Pickle doesn't shine and gives you every cause to judge her unfavourably - but the frame of mind I was in when I read the book, made me only watch her character with curiosity and wonder how it would develop.

And towards the end, as Quick Lamb says when he talks of the Monster : "It's not us and them anymore. It's us and us and us. ... But there's no monsters, only people like us" - I think it would apply to Dolly also.

 

And Sam said it perfectly when he said "She's had her chances, she's nearly finished. Winnin out over someone like that isn't much of a victory. She can only lose from now on in. She's nearly sixty odd. She can only get old and die."

 

She was an awful wife and mother - but did the worst harm to herself. I also wonder how Rose's own character would develop if she had been a more "normal" mother.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great answers bree! :smile2:

 

I found myself bemused by Oriel, if I'm honest. Why did she decamp to the tent in the garden? Did I miss something? It just seemed a petty, selfish thing to do, and she still wanted and expected to be head of the family and run things while isolated herself from them. I wonder if I find it hard to understand mothers and big family dynamics because I'm not maternal, don't have any children and was an only child? One to ponder ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm. Good question, chesilbeach.

Why did she move out into the tent?

 

I think after the Fish incident she had lost her faith in god - and steeled herself to only do what needed to be done - as efficiently possible - as that was the only things in her control.

But the fact that needed to move out of the house to the tent - shows she wasn't as hard as she thought she was or even wanted to be. She was sensitive to the moods of the house, of knowing that she didn't have the kind of bond Lester had with his children, and of Fish's complete ignorance of her.

I think moving to the tent was a way of physically distancing from these underlying hurts, and also to give herself a coolnees, a detached aloofness to function and do her "duties".

We also learn about her childhood - losing family first, then her beloved half-brother - and realise that she has huge fears about being abandoned - of losing people. But instead of turning all clingy she goes the opposite way and takes great efforts to toughen herself and makes herself function almost as if devoid of emotion.

 

And I can imaging how stifling it may have been for her too - she was the one doing all the thinking, planning, executing, taking on all the responsibilities - in fact the two families thrived because of her - as even Dolly acknowlegdes at the end - so I can understand why she'd need a little "me" time. Just to be Oriel, with her insecurities, vulnerabilites, and not as a wife or mother, but just "her".

 

(I must confess, as much I love my partner and little girl, there are times I just want to physically just be by myself.

I may not go as far getting a tent though, I usually end up locking myself in the bathroom for a 2-hour long bath :P )

 

And the fact that the book ends with Oriel packing up the tent, with Dolly's help, I think, shows she's found her peace - that her family loves her, that Fish is finally at rest, and that she won't be abandoned again (as Rose and Quick have decided to stay at Cloudstreet). She finally belongs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3. Was there a particular part you enjoyed more than the rest?

 

I loved the one-to-one conversations between the characters. Three in particular.

 

The first on between Lester and Oriel.

The conversation happens few days after they nurse Quick back to health. They both open themselves up - and express their fears, dejections, and demons.

Some gems from there-

 

You’ve got mean, Oriel.

She sniffs.

Is it the war that’s done it to you?

It’s all war, she said.

What is?

I don’t know. Everythin. Raisin a family, keepin yer head above water. War is our natural state.

 

 

Oh nothing's really strange. Strangeness is ordinary if you let yourself think about it.

 

 

The tent?

I wish I could lace it up and never come out

...

Why?

Then I could get on with the real war

 

 

The second one was between Quick and Lester - after Quick's return to Cloudstreet.

They discuss the family, Oriel in particular, and you realise how well they know her, put up with her bossing, and yet how they love her and wouldn't have it any other way.

 

The third one is my favourite. Between Quick and Oriel on the river, when they go prawning.

You realise how astute and perceptive Oriel actually is, how she knows about Quick's guilt towards Fish's accident. How she's ready to admit that Fish was everyone's favourite.

She also recalls her own childhood tragedies, but, in what I thought spoke volumes of the strength of her character, does not share this memory with Quick, despite being taunted that she "doesn't know the first about feelings" and wouldn't know a thing about the guilt of being the "survivor".

 

This amazing quote is from this conversation-

The strong are here to look after the weak, son, and the weak to teach the strong

 

(Sorry I'm answering in bits and pieces, I'll try and answer the other questions all together)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4. Was this the first book you've read by this author and has it encouraged you to read more?

Yes this was the first one - and I'm not if I'll read his other books.

I'm beginning to realise that I'm not very loyal to authors, I just tend to choose each book for itself.

 

5. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with?

Half way through the book - everything was miserable, and everyone was dull and dejected.

I usually read just before I sleep, and when I came to the bit of how awful Rose had become with her eating disorder - just before she gets the job - I was feeling very low.

I didn't want to continue with the book.

 

6. How did you feel about the Western Australian colloquial and slang words? Did they add flavour to the writing or did they distract you from the story?

As Bobblybear mentioned, I already expect not to understand everything in a book - somethings are there, I think, just to set the mood and atmosphere. The words in this book definitely added flavour.

 

7. Were you engaged immediately with the story, or did it take you a while to get into it?

I didn't even understand what was happening till I reached the 20th page or so.

The unusual style of writing - no quotation marks for conversations, extremely short and numerous chapters - it made me muddled and I was quite lost. But then I slowly got into it and the writing style grew on me. I started looking forward to the cleverly worded chapter titles, bracketed between bits of cloud.

Actually, the book felt more like a play to me, than a novel - with each chapter like an announcement of a scene.

 

8. Overall, was reading the book an enjoyable experience?

Enjoyable, I'm not sure. It was a difficult read. It forces you into facing not-so-pretty, and sometimes plain-ugly realities. It was a heavy read. But I think the writing was exceptional. The characters, the situations, the house itself, have been brought to life with very carefully crafted details.

And there is the streak of surreality and bizarreness running through, almost like the river that's mentioned so many times.

Lots to think about, absorb, and lots to discuss - an excellent choice for a reading circle.

 

9. If you enjoyed the book, would you have liked a sequel? How do you think the story could develop in the sequel?

No. I'm happy to leave the Lambs and Pickleses and Cloudstreet exactly were they were at the end. I don't think I want to know more about them.

 

10. Would you recommend the book to others?

Again I'm not sure. Only if I know they are in the frame of mind for something like this, or are actively seeking a heavy read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi bree, they were in my reading blog, but I'll copy them here to make it easier :smile2:

 

Akubra - the brand name of a type of hat

grousest - coolest/most awesome

chiack - to taunt or tease in jest

snags - sausages

jarrah - a type of wood

gilgies - the Noongar name for a small freshwater crayfish of the South West

Aquadhere - brand name of a type of glue

Carn - short for "come on"

"it's as yeller as Tojo" - reference to Japanese Prime Minister during WW2?

polony - type of processed meat (looks a bit like Spam?)

hosco - ??? No idea!

mallee - a type of woody shrub like eucalyptus

 

Wow, no wonder you had trouble with some of the words! We're pretty familiar with Aussie-speak in NZ because we use a lot of the same words but I've only ever heard 'grousest', 'snags', 'chiack' and 'jarrah' from that list. :blush2:

 

Even if I don't read this book, I will remember the quote you are using as your signature Bree. It is so very true.

Edited by poppy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1. Who was your favourite character?.
Oriel was my favourite character because she was strong, held everything together & she was the one to turn to in a crisis. I also felt very compassionate towards her when Fish stopped acknowledging her that must have been incredibly hard for her as a mother & a lesser woman would have gone under i think.

2. ... and your least favourite?

Sam & Dolly Pickles because they were so weak. I hated the way he gambled away all their money & she was too lazy & shiftless to look after her own children & because of them Rose had to leave school early, that drove me mad.

 

3. Was there a particular part you enjoyed more than the rest?

Really had to rack my brains over this one but i think the way Oriel waged war against the rival shop & won i thought good for her.

 

4. Was this the first book you've read by this author and has it encouraged you to read more?

This was the first book i've read by Tim Winton & no i don't think i'd actively seek out anything else by him .

5. Were there any parts/ideas you struggled with?

Yes i didn't see the point of the aborigine to the story , why was Quick glowing in the dark after his fishing trip? The way Fish as a mentally retarded person came across in the story. The whole thing about the murderer seemed pointless perhaps it would have been more interesting if it had turned out to be someone who we knew. As Chesil mentioned why did Oriel move into the tent ?

 

6. How did you feel about the Western Australian colloquial and slang words? Did they add flavour to the writing or did they distract you from the story?

I didn't have a problem with the slang words most of them i could work out what they meant & the others i made a guess at .

 

7. Were you engaged immediately with the story, or did it take you a while to get into it?

I read it at quite a steady pace but to be honest i never really got into it.

 

8. Overall, was reading the book an enjoyable experience?

I'd have to say not really . I'm not sure why because this is usually the type of story i really enjoy but i couldn't get into any of the characters & found the book a bit depressing. When Rose gets a job & meets someone i thought finally something is going right for someone but no it all went wrong & then when her and Quick get together but she loses the baby it was just so depressing.

9. If you enjoyed the book, would you have liked a sequel? How do you think the story could develop in the sequel?

 

10. Would you recommend the book to others?

I don't think i could recommend the book to anyone else as i didn't really enjoy it myself but i think perhaps that was more down to my personal taste rather than the quality of the writing
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, the book is depressing, but that's unfortunately the way it was for many families around that time! A lot of Australia's classic novels are similarly depressing (For the Term of His Natural Life by Marcus Clarke and The Harp in the South by Ruth Park are two other examples).

 

I think it's important to keep in mind Australia's convict and working-class history, which doesn't make the story any less depressing, but hopefully it will help to explain why it is so depressing. The brilliance of Cloudstreet, in my opinion, is that it so accurately depicts the struggles of working-class Australians. To portray it any differently would be an affront to our history and culture. As an example, the serial killer was an actual person who terrorised the area for several years (more information at Wikipedia), so it was included in the story to help place it in a historical context.

 

Unfortunately, I can't remember the part about the aborigine. I did a bit of searching on the Internet and the consensus seems to be that he appears to remind the characters of the importance of family. I have no idea why Quick glowed in the dark! I agree with Bree that 'some things are there just to set the mood and atmosphere'.

 

I can't really answer the specific questions, because it has been a while since I've read it, but I don't think a sequel would work for Cloudstreet. It is one of my favourite books and stands wonderfully and perfectly on its own, I feel. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

About Quick glowing -

 

I think one level it was a physical reaction to his having a surreal out-of-body experience - he kept seeing his own self running, he sees a man walking on water, he sees the aborigine - none of it makes sense to him and have obviously shaken him up and scared him witless.

 

On another level I think it to emphasis the randomness, the strangeness, and how unnatural that period was.

When Lester asks Oriel why she moved out into the tent, she says:

 

Why's Quick lit up like a beacon? Why is Fish the way he is? Why does this house . . . behave?

Strange, says Lester.

Oh, nothin's really strange. Strangeness is ordinary if you think about it. There's been queerness all your life. I've seen stranger things than Quick glowin, haven't you?

 

Obviously it doesn't make sense - the glowing - but it's there, I think, to emphasis the fact that nothing around that time made sense, or was the way it was supposed to be. And this was just one more such thing.

 

As an example, the serial killer was an actual person who terrorised the area for several years (more information at Wikipedia), so it was included in the story to help place it in a historical context.

 

I didn't know that - that's very interesting Kylie - that he was an actual person.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's interesting, Kidsmum, as I don't think it's a depressing book at all, I just see it as a portrayal of a family in the period, and every family has their ups and downs. Taking Rose as an example, she doesn't have a happy adolescence, and the eating disorder starts, but once she gets that first job and a sense of independence and freedom from the family, she overcomes it, but after the miscarriage it comes to the fore again as an involuntary coping mechanism, but obviously not a good one as it causes its own physical problems.

 

I remember when I was growing up, there was an Australian television series shown over here called The Sullivans, and it was initially set at the start of the war. It mainly looked at how the war affected the family, but it's also about Australian family life during that period, so I had that in my head a lot of time while I was reading the book. I remember it used to be on just after I got home from school, and it was something me and my mum would sit down and watch together. Reading the book brought back that memory and gave me a fondness for the story and the characters despite what they were going through, and also I felt it exemplified one of the characteristics I think we have of the Aussies, in that they're fighters and never give up.

Edited by chesilbeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

I think it's important to keep in mind Australia's convict and working-class history, which doesn't make the story any less depressing, but hopefully it will help to explain why it is so depressing. The brilliance of Cloudstreet, in my opinion, is that it so accurately depicts the struggles of working-class Australians. To portray it any differently would be an affront to our history and culture. As an example, the serial killer was an actual person who terrorised the area for several years (more information at Wikipedia), so it was included in the story to help place it in a historical context.

 

Yes i take your point about the history & the book needing to accurately portray that period in time & i didn't have a problem with them being poor or working class but to me it just seemed unrelently joyless & i really struggled to have any strong feelings for any of the characters which for me is really important in a story & i think it was that which affected how i felt about the book. That's very interesting about the serial killer being a real person , is the part about his son drowning & the authorities refusing to grant his wish for them to be buried together true as well ?

 

 

About Quick glowing -

 

I think one level it was a physical reaction to his having a surreal out-of-body experience - he kept seeing his own self running, he sees a man walking on water, he sees the aborigine - none of it makes sense to him and have obviously shaken him up and scared him witless.

 

On another level I think it to emphasis the randomness, the strangeness, and how unnatural that period was.

 

Obviously it doesn't make sense - the glowing - but it's there, I think, to emphasis the fact that nothing around that time made sense, or was the way it was supposed to be. And this was just one more such thing.

 

Thanks for that Bree, it kind of reminded me of the Simpsons cartoon :smile:

 

That's interesting, Kidsmum, as I don't think it's a depressing book at all, I just see it as a portrayal of a family in the period, and every family has their ups and downs. Taking Rose as an example, she doesn't have a happy adolescence, and the eating disorder starts, but once she gets that first job and a sense of independence and freedom from the family, she overcomes it, but after the miscarriage it comes to the fore again as an involuntary coping mechanism, but obviously not a good one as it causes its own physical problems.

 

I remember when I was growing up, there was an Australian television series shown over here called The Sullivans, and it was initially set at the start of the war. It mainly looked at how the war affected the family, but it's also about Australian family life during that period, so I had that in my head a lot of time while I was reading the book. I remember it used to be on just after I got home from school, and it was something me and my mum would sit down and watch together. Reading the book brought back that memory and gave me a fondness for the story and the characters despite what they were going through, and also I felt it exemplified one of the characteristics I think we have of the Aussies, in that they're fighters and never give up.

 

Yes i guess it just wasn't the book for me . I know Rose & Quick did eventually come to terms with their loss & there was light at the end of the tunnel but for me it was too little to late coming right at the end of the book. :smile:

 

I too remember The Sullivans, particularly Kitty & Mrs Jessop, it used to be on at lunchtime when i came home from school in the days before there was any Jeremy Kyle & Cash In The Attic. Happy times :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I love Cloudstreet, such a gorgeous book, I will be answering your questions, as soon as I read it again. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This question is posed on the Penguin website page of reading notes for Cloudstreet:

 

Winton has remarked that Australians have become 'very suburban' and 'don't know anything about the outdoors. Their dads and mums did, and their grandparents did. We are only one generation from the farm, but you'd be surprised at how little people know.' Does Cloudstreet celebrate the 'outdoors' or the suburbs or both? Do you think it seeks to remind people of their rural roots?

 

There are elements within Cloudstreet to remind us of the rural and agricultural, after all, the Lambs come to Cloudstreet having had to leave their farm, and Quick returns to farms for a time as a pest controller, but I'm not sure that it "celebrates" either, what it does is show that there is something in the Lambs that longs for the natural world, as it seems as though all their happy times together see them return to the countryside for their picnics and holidays, as if needing to return to where they came from.

 

I would say that this suburbanisation is not just limited to Australia. I think in the UK we're in the same position. My dad started his working life on a farm, the land of which is now a suburban area within a major city. I remember as a child we spent a lot of time walking in rural and coastal areas, and my parents and grandparents would have told me names of the majority of plants, flowers, birds, insects, etc., that we would have come across on the walks, but I hardly remember any of them.

Edited by chesilbeach
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...