Reading "The Secret River"

Fiction or Fact?

Grenville’s novel has been the subject of both praise and criticism by historians and scholars. However, in order to understand the effects it really had on the colonization narrative, we should look at what the average reader gets from the novel. One interesting factor to point out is that Greville’s novel is, of course, fiction. This poses a problem for the average reader as it blurs the line between historical sources and scholarly work with stories. The novel positions itself as historical fiction, but of course is still made up. It is important also to note that while the novel does seem sympathetic to the aboriginal people, “the novel silences Indigenous voices” (Nolan and Clarke 20). Because of these two factors, Grenville unintentionally perpetuates the misconception that the aboriginal people lacked deeper thought and agency.

Although this critical reading of The Secret River is completely valid, the novel was mostly received as “a positive and much needed re-visioning of the national past” (Nolan and Clarke 20). This is interesting because on the one hand, it could be that people really do feel like The Secret River was educational and important in changing the narrative of Australia’s past. However, because Grenville’s novel does not give the Aboriginal people a voice, the fact that people think that this is a positive representation of their nation’s past is actually concerning and not heartening.

Grenville's Lack of Commentary 

While reading the text myself, I found it difficult to discern if it was helpful or harmful because it offered very little commentary. Part of the purpose of the book was to depict an accurate telling of colonization, therefore the characters in the story would have to be racist and violent in order for this to be done correctly. But depicting racist and violent characters without any commentary in the novel condemning their actions leaves the reader to form their own opinions about the message Grenville was sending. I found that the message was hidden and not explicitly stated. For example, as I described earlier, the Aboriginal people were never given a voice. Whether intentional or not, this does give the impression that they were less than the white settlers. The other important aspect I’d like to look at are the descriptions of the indigenous people. When describing the way an indigenous man tried to communicate with Thorhill, Grenville writes, “This was a kind of madness, as if a dog were to bark in English” (Grenville 6). Comparing the man to a dog is incredibly demeaning. What’s more is this isn’t something that is expressed as Thornhill’s thoughts or something he says, this is just the description that Grenville gave.

Sources:

Nolan, Maggie, and Robert Clarke. “Reading Groups and Reconciliation: Kate Grenville’s The Secret River and the Ordinary Reader.” Australian Literary Studies, vol. 29, no. 4, Nov. 2014, pp. 19–35. EBSCOhost, https://doi-org.libproxy.scu.edu/10.20314/als.589e1e5b02.

Grenville, Kate. The Secret River . The Text Publishing Company, 2005.