Speaker 1 0:00

The Kill City podcast acknowledges the traditional custodians of the lands we're on. Here in Melbourne, that's the Wurrundjeri Woi Worong people of the Kulin Nation. We honour their deep connection to storytelling, a tradition carried across more than 2,000 generations. Pay our respects to elders past, present and emerging, and we extend that acknowledgement to First Nations people listening today. My name's Helen, and as usual, I'm joined by Leigh to look at all things Australian crime fiction. Now today we're looking at someone I'm not very familiar with, but I know you are Leigh, and that's Australian crime fiction novelist and creator of the long-running Les Norton series, the late Robert G. Barrett. Now, before we get stuck in, just a quick heads up for listeners, the Les Norton books, particularly the early novels, including the first Les book, Wouldn't Be Dead for Quids, were very much a product of their time. Now they're full of language and attitudes and humour that kind of doesn't always land comfortably now, and some of the elements can feel pretty dated or actually inappropriate by today's standards. But we just wanted to flag that we're talking about them in their historical context, not that we're endorsing every aspect. So we just wanted to give this a little gentle content warning before we dive in. Now, Leigh, how are you today?

Speaker 1:47

I'm well, thanks. Interesting discussion ahead on Robert G. Barrett and um and his impact on the Australian crime writing scene, which to be honest, I think is unlike um any other to say the least. And um it they're all good points you make. Uh it's um he clearly wrote these books in a different time where people's attitudes um to this sort of stuff are probably a bit different, it's safe to say. Um and yes, and definitely inappropriate by today's standard.

Speaker 1 2:14

Yeah, it is um it is really interesting going back with a with a view on history, and I think um we could spend a whole other podcast probably talking about that. But yeah, today I'm just really interested in hearing a bit more about um, you know, an author you talk a lot about, Barrett. So before we get into the specifics of wouldn't be dead for quids, how about we start with the man behind it all? Now, for listeners who might not know about um Robert G. Barrett, and I actually include myself in that, can you give us a bit of the Lather Landley? Can you tell us who he was and where does his main character, Les Norton, come from?

Speaker 2:47

So Robert G. Barrett, or Bob, as he was often referred to, um, was a Sydney -sider who grew up in Bondi Beach and dropped out of school at um the age of 14, which highlights the different landscape to the one we know today. I mean, can kids even leave school at 14 these days? Um and then he became after leaving school, he became a butcher and then a a boner, which I think is somebody in an abattoir. Anyway, uh at some point in his career he suffered like quite a bad injury at work when uh when a hind quarter fell on him and tore all these tendons in his arm. Um and as somebody who'd always liked writing letters and reading, he did three writing courses at the Workers' Education Authority while he was on a workers' compensation um after the accident, which had effectively ruled him out of the trade that he'd been in. So previous to that he'd done a bunch of different things. I think he'd spent time as a bouncer in the Sydney pub and nightclub scene. And I know, and I mentioned this in our episode on um on Peter Corras titled Mean Streets, um, that Barrett actually had a role in the Empty Beach, the film adaptation of the Peter Corus novel. Um I'm pretty sure he did some TV work in there as well. And anybody that had watched the um the ABC adaptation, the the TV series, I think he touched on some of that because the Norton character sort of mirrored him a little bit by doing some random TV and ad commercial work over the years. Anyway, somewhere along the way, and I guess it was in his sort of mid-30s, he actually started writing for Penthouse magazine. I think he was a columnist at um People magazine at one point as well.

Speaker 1 4:28

Gee, he was a bit of a jack of all trades, wasn't he? And when and when you look at where he was writing in those years, places like Penthouse and People, I think it actually sheds a bit of light on that tone that he carried into Les Norton books. Um, because you know those magazines, you know, were really built on provocation, um, they were really blokey, they had really politically incorrect humour. Probably not publications I'd endorse by any stretch of the imagination, but they were part of the media landscape that he came up through. And I think that influence is pretty obvious in his early fiction. And so, given all of that, I think it's fair to stay that he didn't actually take the standard path to becoming the author of the 25 books and that he did do, and the fact that he sold more than a million copies across his in career, which was incredible.

Speaker 5:19

Uh most definitely. I mean, it was certainly a unique path that he followed, but I think it was something that helped him all the way through his career stay really connected to his audience and his fans. Like he could never in a million years be accused of forgetting who he was and where he came from, but we'll likely touch on that a little bit later on. Um and even now, years after his death, you know, the Robert G. Barrett Facebook group is full of fans who are so enthusiastic to continue keeping his legacy alive and celebrating his career. And at the start of each of his books, back then, he used to write his fans a letter and sort of basically telling them what he'd been up to. Um, you know, he'd often sprooky his merch and other bits and pieces along the way. Um I think occasionally he'd sort of call out, you know, why he took Les on a particular adventure or so I'm not sure how many other authors would have been doing that at that point, but um something that's sort of unique that he that he had.

Speaker 1 6:19

I love that. I love that he um he he gave his his fans that um little bit of insight into what was going on in his brain, so I'm sure that's very much appreciated. Now, while I confess to not being a Barrett reader, I have done my due diligence because I was trying to do um a little bit learning about his career and whatnot. And from what I can glean, I think he was in his early 40s when his first book, um, You Wouldn't Be Dead for Quids, um, which was actually published in 1984, came out.

Speaker 6:50

Yeah, that's right. I think he was about 42 when that came out, but it wasn't a novel per se, more sort of four short novella-length stories that all featured Les Norton, who would be the main focus of his fiction for the next almost 30 years. Um this was how Les was introduced. It's the backcover blurb of You Wouldn't Be Dead for Quids. Les Norton has just hit town. You wouldn't be dead for Quids is a series of adventures involving Les Norton, a big red-headed country boy from Queensland, who's forced to move to the Big Smoke when things get a little hot for him in his hometown. Working as a bouncer at an illegal casino up at the cross, Les gets to meet some of the fascinating characters who make up the seamier side of one of the most exciting cities in the world. Gamblers, conmen, bookies, bouncers, hookers, and hitmen who ply their respective trades from the golden sands of Bondi to the tainted gutters of King's Cross, usually on the wrong side of the law. As raw as a greyhound's dinner, Les is nevertheless a top bloke, fond of a drink, loves a laugh, and he's pretty handy with his fists. And, just quietly, he's a bit of a ladies' man too. Les Norton is undoubtedly an Australian cult figure.

Speaker 1 8:04

I love it. And um, Leigh, I feel like you were sitting there with rum and coke and a Siggy in the other hand while you were reading that. I feel like that was compulsory.

Speaker 8:14

Rum and Coke. Oh, you know, back in the day, yeah.

Speaker 1 8:18

I was gonna say 4X, but that was a bit cleansland, but he moved to Sydney, didn't he? I don't know what beer do they drink in Sydney.

Speaker 8:25

Oh well, back in this, they would have all been Tuies and Reshers drinkers, wouldn't they? Back in the back in the 80s?

Speaker 1 8:31

I don't know, not a beer drinker, Leigh. I can't drink. I reckon Reshes.

Speaker 8:35

I reckon I actually learned how to be a barman in New South Wales, and uh um I'm pretty sure they're all drinking Reshers, Reshers and Tuies back then, so it was a long time ago.

Speaker 1 8:46

Alrighty, we'll we'll we'll take your word for it, I think. Now actually I just want to know, was he in the habit of writing novellas or shorter Les Norton stories?

Speaker 8:56

No, after not after Wouldn't Be Dead for Quids. Um I know he would have written short stories, and I know he did these little compilation books of his columns and other bits and pieces. Um, but no, this from a Les Norton point of view and his published books, um, all of the Les Nortons, the next 24 of them, were all standard length um structure novels, so yeah, it was the only time he did it.

Speaker 1 9:23

Which I guess interesting.

Speaker 9:24

Which I guess makes sense is probably we talk about him coming from that um unorthodox way of getting to where he did. He was probably a bit of a risk for any publisher back in the day with this character. Maybe that was their way to sort of test the waters on it. I don't know. We never know the answer to that question, but maybe there was something in that.

Speaker 1 9:44

Okay, interesting. So we've given some sort of clues about what his novels were like and what they touched on, but if you actually had to explain um Les North and you know um Robert Barrett's work to someone who didn't know anything about it, like how would you kind of sum it up quite simply and succinctly?

Speaker 10:05

I would say that Les inhabited this world full of larger-than-life characters in Sydney's underbelly. Um, the world Barrett created for Les was this humorous and action-driven take on crime fiction deeply rooted in Australian working class culture. Um, somewhere in every Barrett book, there is no doubt an urn in it for Les where he's trying to find his next financial windfall, um, oftentimes which would end up in a shoebox under his bed or the like. Um crassness humour played a huge role, and his writing style and his public persona really emphasised this. Um, his was a Larrican voice that um resonated strongly with popular readers despite limited critical acclaim. Barrett's voice in his writing was characterised by a colloquial Australian slang, fast-paced conversational narration, um, and a tone that resembles storytelling in a pub, I reckon, rather than formal literature. There were some quirks in how he wrote that while not especially in depth, he had this thing, he always told you what Les was wearing, um, and maybe he was one of the early um influences talking about what people ate. I know there was no Instagram in the 80s, but he always talked about what Les ate. Um and you were but you were never under any illusion about where you were. Now he was quite provocative with you know really politically incorrect humour that challenged norms and and most certainly alienated critics and other writers, um, while attracting a very loyal readership, um as I said before. Um, you know this irreverence was central to his authorial identity. But in saying that, he was quite crass, so I'm mindful that um he'd be a long way from being everybody's cup of tea.

Speaker 1 12:04

Yeah, no, that's um that's a really interesting wrap-up. Look, as I said, I wasn't familiar with him, so I did go and find a snippet on I think it was Google Books or something to have a listen and yep, confirmed pretty quickly he wasn't my cup of tea. I was glad there was a language warning on the thing. But what I wanted to do though was because I think it's really interesting to explore um you know what people are interested in different types of books. So I actually um found a mate called Frank and he's been reading them for years, and he's a fan. Um so I just wanted him to talk me through the appeal of it. And um if I tell you a bit about Frank, he's actually a real science fiction and fantasy fan, so we actually spend a bit of time talking about those books, um, and he loves authors like um Isaac Asimov, who of course wrote the Foundation series. He also really likes Terry Pratchett, who writes the Discworld books. Um so he's used to kind of books with those really big worlds and kind of big ideas. Um, but for the for him, Barrett um he got into the Barrett books basically because um they were just so easy to fall into. And in his words, he said, you know, they weren't deep, they weren't philosophical, they were just really visual, and Barrett's writing kind of just really um made the scenes just pop straight into his head, um which I just loved hearing him say that. He also said that he thought that the plots were completely over the top, particularly in the beginning, because but he didn't really actually know much about that world, and he realised that he learned more about King's Cross and the Sydney crime scene in the 80s and 90s by reading them, and he he realised then as he got older that Barrett really kind of knew what he was talking about, and then part of the draw for him was that that world kind of felt like a sort of a parallel Australia to the one it kind of seemed a bit familiar, but wasn't actually like his own life. Um, and then the other thing Frank told me, which was just so interesting, was that you know he was really up front. The books are not politically correct, the humour's really dark, but what keeps drawing him in is that comedy and that pure escapism, and that that's just what he really enjoyed. So, Leigh, for you, does that track um to how you see Barrett's appeal?

Speaker 14:18

Well, just before I answer that, I'm just something you just said then. I wonder how many Asimov and Barrett readers there are, because I'm I'm not sure. Like that is a pretty remarkable left v right.

Speaker 1 14:32

Um I know the Venn diagram. Can you imagine it? Maybe maybe Frank is the only person in the country, maybe the world who's in that. I he did promise me he's going to listen to this episode, so I'm expecting to hear from him after this.

Speaker 14:46

Um it's really good to hear somebody else's perspective on it. And like I said, I haven't read a Barrett book in more than two decades, and I obviously had to do a little bit of just you know, sort of re-researching him in the lead up to this episode. Um, but so it's really good to get somebody else's take on it versus what I can recall from back in the day. So um thank you very much for for that, Frank. Um, but yeah, Asimov and Barrett. That's interesting combination.

Speaker 1 15:13

I know, I think I've just spun your head now, haven't I, Leigh?

Speaker 15:17

You have a little bit, you have a little bit. Um, and before I forget, something else that we're just talking about then just triggered something in my mind. I've got a funny feeling, and I'd need to do a bit of a bit of research on this. I think when, and we probably should have talked about this when we did the adaptations uh episode a few weeks back, but I didn't recall it until now. I've got a funny feeling that when that came out, that um Andrew Bolt actually wrote a column on or an opinion piece on why he didn't believe this was an appropriate investment from the ABC or something of the like. I've I've got that in my head. I'll see whether I can find it. Um it's just kind of shaking loose now. Um what's triggered that.

Speaker 1 16:06

But um Well, we love a rabbit hole, Leigh, so yeah.

Speaker 16:10

We do, and just like the one I've just taken us on then, so I'll I've digressed. So um anyway, but no absolutely back to my original question?

Speaker 1 16:17

Do you want me to ask again?

Speaker 16:18

No, no, that's all I've I've got it. I think um um no, but my research or re-research has sort of led me to believe that there was some very, very deliberate strategy in what he did. He did know his audience incredibly well, um, and what they liked, but more importantly, what they what they didn't like. Um later in the episode we do some referencing of um of a farewell note that appeared on the Newtown Review of Books, which I've lent on quite a bit for the research in this episode. There's parts in that that talk about how fierce he was at protecting elements of his writing um and how he would often be at sort of real loggerheads with with editors. Um so he could certainly never be accused of not knowing who his um who his audience were. But um I've I r I learnt quite a bit when I was researching for this episode. It was written by one of his publishers and editors during the latter part of his career. I'll put a link to it in the show notes because I think it's a proper peek behind the curtain from someone who who really knew Barrett. Um but one part reads Umot being politically correct was a point of pride. So everyone and everything was fair game. You name it, he mocked it. But he also mocked himself and was unsparingly direct.

Speaker 1 17:38

I think that's the kernel to it, is it? The fact that he mocked himself. It's not it sounds like he just really didn't take himself seriously, but he just knew, knew how to um attract an audience. Yeah. I think that was the bottom line. Yeah. Look, if his work was your thing, you'd probably say it kind of was fast and funny and full of action, and it was that escapism that Frank talked about. But equally a lot of people found it really inappropriate. So while it was easy to read and went down quickly, um, you know, it was never going to be treated as high literary art. And um he knew it. And I don't think he cared by the sounds of it.

Speaker 18:15

No, exactly. And I will say this: look, I'm always in favour of people finding a book that gets them reading, especially if they're not usually readers. And fiction is obviously that gateway in out and it's really valuable. Um, but that doesn't mean that every book is for everyone, obviously, all that all content is harmless. Barrett's work definitely rubs some people the wrong way. Plenty of readers found it crude or offensive, but for others, it was the thing that got them turning pages, and I think that's the space that his books occupy. And I think this line from the Newtown Review of Books um uh farewell really summed up where he sits in that Australian reading landscape. Um Bob connected with people who didn't necessarily consider themselves book readers. His characters talked like people they knew, and the stories were set in real places around Australia. They were full of action and they were funny. His character, Les Norton, was a big red-headed Queenslander who lived in Bondi and worked as a bouncer for Price Galisi at the Kelly Club in King's Cross. The books had a big following in the armed forces and the prisons, but also had a legion of female fans to match the blokes. Bob loved going on tour and meeting his readers who are known as the Norton Army.

Speaker 1 19:34

Yeah, and I think that lines up with something I read as well, that Barrett's books sort of feel less like a traditional crime novel and more like someone just firing off a fast funny yarn at you at the pub, probably with your rum and coke or your what was that beer again?

Speaker 19:48

Reshers.

Speaker 1 19:49

That's right, or reshes. And look, that's exactly what my mate Frank was talking about. You know, while it's not a tone that I would personally champion, I think it explains why, you know, some people it resonates for them. They just link it to that really Aussie Larrican style.

Speaker 20:04

And he could never be accused of selling out or changing. Um, I remember years ago talking to a particularly well-regarded Australian literary author who ended up on a writer's panel with him at a writers' festival, who was mortified by the way he carried himself. Um, if I've recalled this story correctly, which I'm pretty sure I have, he feigned being asleep on the panel, started making snoring sounds, and realistically, he was probably deliberately thumbing his nose at what he considered to be the literary elite. Um and I've thought about this over the years. I mean, anybody who paired the two of them, I suspect, had done so purposely to highlight the chasm between the two. Because describing them as chalk and cheese would be one of the great understatements ever. Um, like I can't see how pairing these two particular writers on a panel could have ended any other way. And if I didn't know better, I'd suggest that somebody had deliberately done it to stir the pot.

Speaker 1 21:07

Well, I'm guessing Eilee, you're not gonna tell me who who the other literary well-regarded author was, but I reckon if it happened today, I would have known about it because it would have been on Instagram before the event had even finished.

Speaker 21:20

100% would have been on the gram for sure.

Speaker 1 21:23

On a more reflective note, um Robert G. Barrett died on the 20th of September 2012. Very sadly, he was only 69, and it was after a long battle with bowel cancer. And Leigh, you've actually got a passage from the Newtown Review of Books that actually I think is a really nice um fitting eulogy that captures who he was.

Speaker 21:43

I do. Um it's a great piece, and it says more than I ever could. Um Bob Barrett was a one-off, a true original. He could be crude and rude, but also generous and tender-hearted. He had a tremendous sense of humour and the great gift of being able to make people laugh. And he was unflinchingly honest. His essay about cancer treatments in bowling for Bukowski at the end of his last book, Still Riding on the Storm, is both intimate and shocking in its frankness. Bob was diagnosed with bowel cancer in 2008 and was remarkably stoic during his illness. If you asked him how he was, he'd tell you, but he was more often talking about how others were worse off than he was. Though one day when the pain was bad, he said to me, Make sure you have the tests, don't ever get this thing. He had nearly twelve months of remission after his last lot of treatment and had been doing research for a new book. The end when it came was mercifully swift. Farewell, Bob Barrett. We will not see your like again.

Speaker 1 22:40

Ah, well that's quite a note to end this episode on. Barrett really did have a colourful life and career, and while he wasn't everyone's cup of tea or rum and coke, he clearly struck a chord with a huge number of readers who kept coming back for more.

Speaker 22:56

He did, absolutely. Um, and for anyone listening, we've popped links to Les Norton's books in our show notes. Um so have a read if you're interested. Again, we know he's not um everyone's cup of tea, rum and coke, or bougie craft beer. But um, if you're interested, have a listen. Have a read.

Speaker 1 23:16

That's true. Um that's it from us this time. So thanks for listening to Kill City. We're putting the bookmark back in the book until we see you next time.