Cleaner Dreams
Bryant Apolonio on Brian Castro
“Those who couldn’t tell stories, wrote letters.”
Brian Castro, Shanghai Dancing
The narrator of Brian Castro’s most recent novel Chinese Postman is a critically acclaimed novelist named Abraham Quin. Abe Quin is not Brian Castro. Quin is a retired creative writing professor in his mid-seventies, who lives a reclusive life on a bush block in the Adelaide Hills with his rescue dogs. He suspects he is dying: “losing his life: losing his possessions and gaining depression, obsessions and repressions.” Abe Quin isn’t Brian Castro, but they sometimes share a voice. It is a voice that is at turns effervescent and resentful, self-righteous and provocative, struck through with a sense of resignation. He evokes the narrators of W. G. Sebald and Daša Drndić with their long digressions, use of paraphrase and quotation, the thick impasto of fiction and history and personal memory. Quin is a disillusioned writer who sees himself as a mere “scrivener”. Bartleby in old age, dependent on whiskey, cursed with a bad back and gum disease, subjected to gastroscopies and endoscopies, married three times, divorced twice. “I deal with trivia and fret over trivia,” he proclaims.
A loose series of events comprises the book’s plot. The writer sits at his desk and struggles to write. He engages in an email correspondence with a woman in Ukraine that he suspects, at first, to be a “bearded scammer”; he constructs a Japanese-style outhouse with the aid of his neighbour; he sells a stamp collection. It is a meditative work, a book of memory. Quin reflects on his mother and father, his youth, his migration to Australia, the people he has loved. He contemplates art and desire, death and legacy. He ponders the pain in his bowels and writes, at length, about shit. This wouldn’t be the first time a postmodernist has fixated on the scatological, though it’s hard to think of a novel where shit is tasked with representing so much (Quin might joke about floating signifiers). Bodily waste takes has the grave thematic import it has in a DeLillo or Pynchon. The faecal sculptures in David Foster Wallace’s short story “The Suffering Channel” spring to mind. Shit is death, obviously (“[it] is the smell of death, much stronger than the smell of blood…”) and all the indignities of ageing (“Nursing homes smell overwhelmingly of shit and echo with the verbiage of dementia, a Morse of logorrhea”). Shit is nature—the real, embodied world (“It is important that writing smells because life smells. Dogs are alive because they smell”). Art is shit, or at least good art stinks. An artist should be vulnerable, and their work should shock and unsettle us. Anything less is “summer reading for bourgeois ladies” and bloodless sleight of hand. “You give your life to your craft in order to provide some insight and life for others,” he laments. “But you die doing it, and not many care, having lost the communal nose for ordure. In other words, no one gives a shit unless there is sanitised order: chronological or narratorial.”
Perfect Days and Chinese Postman are subversive works in different and contrary ways: Wenders’ in the way it withholds from the audience, Castro’s in the way it discloses. The subjects are alike, but the interiority of the novel gives us a precise accounting of Quin’s inner turmoil that we aren’t afforded of Hiriyama. Castro does not insist that Quin is a noble figure, and we aren’t expected to fill in his blanks. He is no hunger artist but an old man of ego and appetite. Chinese Postman is a claustrophobically close study of a mind that is “a geography of anxiety, a nervous, sinuous network of mini-crises.” He claims to have once enjoyed his “peaceful reminiscences” in his younger days, before the “brain fog”, but it’s hard to imagine a mind like Quin’s knowing tranquillity for any decent stretch. Much of his disquiet stems from his status as an outsider in Australia where “being Asian is a physical effort.” He recalls experiences with childhood bullies in boarding school, bigoted university lecturers, “white and blonde [women who] seemed to regard me as an ink spot needing white-out”, altercations with racists and nationalists, the scourge of sinophobes during the pandemic. There are benign moments of unbelonging as when, on a trip to China, a young couple “approached him in English, smiling and asking if he were Uighur.” He could speak Cantonese but had no Mandarin and so in Beijing “like everywhere else” he was a stranger.
What happens to the writer’s authentic self when they use so much as their life as fodder for their fiction? Or, as Quin puts it: “Can the past be expressed without the turmoil of one ego being replaced by another?” If readers of biographies and autobiographies “can die into someone else’s life” the same might be said for those books’ authors. His body of work is populated with these heteronymous apparitions, superimposed on the author’s authentic self: a self whose experiences have been embroidered and embellished as each book demanded. Where does Quin end and Castro begin? Like his mother, Quin is consumed by his most painful memories. She “employed tenses interchangeably [and was] always present in the past.” Her “depression and melancholia” was her “lethal legacy” to him. He now wonders whether his constant examination of his own past has meant that he has “lived most of his life backwards, without discovering happiness.” Oblivion would be simpler. In forgetting, one can “[erase] the hurts and the embarrassments and the idiocies.” But Quin resists Pontious Pilate’s “willed forgetting” and advocates for a “proactive” ethics of remembrance and responsibility. It is not merely about the remembrance of our own pain, but of historic brutality and ongoing injustice too; dispossession and genocide; our assimilation into the amnesiac settler-colony. We should grit our teeth and suffer the smell. “There is a difference between being guilty and being responsible,” he concludes. “One is recursive: I’m not to blame; I wasn’t there. Let me out of here. The other is proactive. I am in some way responsible, albeit indirectly, for not acting. I am not afraid of taking some blame.”
✷
Iryna Zarębina sends emails from Lviv as the Russian army advances through the Donbas. “I am reading one of your books on the doorstep of war,” she writes. “You once wrote about war eloquently, so the critics said. I do not believe anyone can write eloquently about war.” Quin often finds himself chastened by her words. How frivolous his musings must be to a woman like Iryna who describes cruise missiles raining down on power plants and dogs without owners roaming the streets. Quin tangles up grammatical persons but Iryna mixes up her wars—“German to Soviet and back again”—as she shares her grandmother’s stories about life under the Reich and, later, Stalin. He has only read of war, and dreamt of it. Prior to the events of the novel, he dropped a lit Havana on the carpet of his library and burned it down amidst dreams of a Polish forest during the Nazi occupation. He has a “whole lifetime of reading … about disasters and wars always in a setting of natural beauty.”
Ever since he was a young, “pathologically shy” young man Quin has loved letter-writing since, in letters, he was able to “remain hidden”. They are another literary puzzle box:
To him, it was moral camouflage, not motives that inspired [letters]. Enacting one role to elicit another response. And so on. Gradually the other writer is revealed as either ingenuous or as a player, and if the latter is the case, then let the game begin.
These sections are more or less played straight relative to the rest of the novel. Quin believes that his connection to Iryna is “beyond the ludic”, so the metafictive mischief is turned down and he treats her experiences with appropriate solemnity. Often, the best he feels he can offer is silence. When Iryna sends him a poem that describes her assault by Russian soldiers, he “did not know how to respond.” He is “paralysed, waiting for a sign.” When she writes that her husband may have been killed in a massacre in Olenivka, he says nothing because he feels that “a response would sound hollow and no words would be able to describe adequately any comfort or condolence.” During a period of mourning, Quin claims that “Wittgenstein was right: the world cannot be explained except outside of it when it records a cry of pain.” Perhaps it should not surprise us that a novelist’s ‘late style’ work is concerned, in part, with language’s inability to ameliorate or redeem us but Castro/Quin is not satisfied with leaving that proposition uninterrogated. He reflects on ‘silence’ in a manner that recalls his ethics of remembrance: it is often imperative that we countenance the unsayable, that we ask ourselves what or whom silence serves. To remain silent often “was the worst expression of empathy” and yet silence could also be an apt response to grief where it was “not unfeeling, but […] an honesty shared and meant to be shared.”
We eventually find out that Iryna’s husband is still alive (a “happy ending of sorts,” Quin thinks) and her emails cease abruptly. Facing a silence without end, Quin is soon back into old grooves: the heavy drinking, the pessimism, the fixation on death, “the knot in his bowels at the end of each day […] hardly moral camouflage now, but reality, and soon to be an unreality.” There is a “cemetery beyond the hedgerow where the silence is only broken by birdsong at dawn and dusk.” This image—of birdsong breaking the silence, of caged birds singing—recurs throughout the novel. Like the Qing Dynasty postmen who supposedly walked around with canaries in cages on their heads as they delivered mail, Quin these days feels that he has “a caged bird in my head hardly ever sings and never flies.” He recalls the words of a friend deployed in Vietnam. “After the incoming artillery rounds […] if you’re still conscious” there is an “atavistic silence.” He continues: “You will listen for the bird call and if you find it […] you are then back in the world of unreality.” Grief will shock us into silence—after that we can choose what we will do with it. Quin is a scrivener of unreality by calling. Long ago, he made the choice to canalise his despair into exquisite sentences and ambitious novels: this is both the cause of his deep loneliness and his only means of escape.
✷✷✷
Works Cited
✷ Castro, Brian. “Blue Max, W.G. Sebald: A Tribute.” Heat 3, Series 2, February 2002.
———Chinese Postman. Giramondo, 2024.
———“Rekindling Disquiet.” Liminal, 27 April 2022.
———Shanghai Dancing. Giramondo, 2003.
———“Sensible Seeing: A Place in the Country by W.G. Sebald.” Sydney Review of Books, August 30, 2013.
✷ Kafka, Franz. Collected Stories. Translated by Willa and Edwin Muir. Knopf, 2015.
✷ McIntosh, Leah Jing. “Review: Chinese Postman by Brian Castro.” The Age, 5 November 2024.
✷ Said, Edward. “Thoughts on Late Style.” The London Review of Books Vol 26, No.15, 5 August 2004.
✷ Sebald, W. G. Vertigo. New Directions, 2016.
✷ Tan, Cher. “Interview #203 with Brian Castro.” Liminal, 2022.
Bryant Apolonio is an award-winning writer currently based in Sydney, Australia. His fiction has won the Deborah Cass Prize, the Liminal Fiction Prize and the Overland Fair Australia Prize. He recently received the Frank Moorhouse Fellowship for Young Writers. He is working on his first novel.