‘This House of Grief’ by Helen Garner

A deeply thoughtful, reflective account of a distressing murder trial. One reviewer likened it to Dostoyevsky’s Crime and Punishment; the Chief Justice of Victoria called it “utterly riveting”. Garner has written that she “thought of the law as a vast poem about the terribleness and beauty of life, like religion or philosophy”: Bernadette Brennan, A Writing Life: Helen Garner and Her Work, Text, 2017, p 276.

Looking to reflect on this book? 
Here are a collection of notes on the book’s themes, language and discussion prompts to help you on your way. There are two options for you, in how you can interact to accrue 20 ROJ points within the Brennan Program for the reflection on this book. Please refer to the discussion questions below. 

Notes and Discussion Prompts

Written by Dr. Honni van Rijswijk, Senior Lecturer, UTS Faculty of Law

Important themes
In the material for This House of Grief, there are sentencing and appeal judgments that deal with Farquharson’s guilt, and it’s very interesting to read these to compare/contrast the ways in which the courts have dealt with his guilt and responsibility. Helen Garner’s interest in the trials goes beyond the lawyer’s interest of legal responsibility and legal consequence. I think this is partly what makes her book so fascinating for lawyers—she examines the court’s work in a way that is reverential, and part of her argument is that the court’s role goes beyond the determination of legal questions, extending to a wider cultural significance. Not only does the court examine the specific legal consequences of Farquharson’s responsibility—it also becomes a site in which the community’s sorrow, shock and grief is dealt with in ways that are formal, ritualistic and even sacred.

Language analysis
The linguistic components of This House of Grief--that is, the tone, point of view, word choice, syntax, use of simile and metaphor, and sentence structure—produce particular effects that reinforce the key themes of the book. For example, if we consider point of view: This House of Grief is mostly told in first person, with Garner heavily foregrounding her experience of the trial. The tone in the book differs, and is often quite strong-- e.g. angry, sentimental or pensive. The legal judgments use quite a different point of view and generally a more neutral tone. But the exceptions to this are noteworthy—when you read the legal documents, take note of the moments when justices shift from third person point of view to first? Can you find moments when the tone of the legal text is not neutral but perhaps angry, sorrowful, or strong in other ways? In what ways are the judgments "literary"? What are Garner’s strategies in telling the story the way she does?

Discussion questions to kick start your reflection on This House of Grief 

There are two ways you can accumulate 20 ROJ points in the Brennan Program by reviewing and reflecting on this book. You can:

1. Write your own reflection: Read and reflect by writing a full 1,000 word reflection on the justice themes conveyed in this book, using the resources on this page to kick start your thoughts.
   Upload your reflection to CareerHub to receive 20 ROJ points.
2. Interact with Brennanites during Summer Circle via the Summer Circle Facebook Group (sign up by emailing the Brennan Administrator). 

You can interact by writing reflections to the following discussion questions (all responses equal to 1,000 words). 

i. Step 1: Write a 500-word response to your chosen discussion question below. Upload this in the Facebook Group Brennan Book Program thread via a google doc link (ensure it’s not set to private).

ii. Step 2: Then respond to two other students’ posts for that question (250-words each).

iii. Claim your 20 ROJ: Once all your reflections have been written and posted you can email your collection of three shorter reflections to the Brennan Administrator to claim 20 ROJ points. 

Discussion question one 

At the bottom of this page are copies of four legal documents relating to the case: the original sentencing order, the first appeal, then the second sentencing order and the second appeal. Take some time to read these documents and write a response considering one or more of the following:

1. How do the courts tell the story of the murder? How does this story differ across the sentencing and appeal judgments? How do these stories differ from Helen Garner’s account?
2. How do the sentencing and appeal judgments construct Farquharson’s responsibility for his actions? How does this differ from Helen Garner’s account of responsibility?
3.  How do the sentencing and appeal judgments explain the wider effects—of grief, tragedy, shock—of Farquharson’s actions? How does Garner provide a different account?

Discussion question two 

How is gender handled in This House of Grief? How, in Garner’s opinion, does Farquharson’s experiences/background as a man determine the ways in which Garner deems him responsible for what he has done? 

Case files

1. The original sentencing order (1st sentencing 2007)
2. The first appeal (Appeal 2009)
3. The second sentencing order (2nd sentencing 2010)
4. The second appeal (Appeal 2012)