Introduction
Robert Drewe’s novel “Our Sunshine” (1991) offers a fictionalised portrayal of the infamous Australian outlaw Ned Kelly, blending historical facts with imaginative narrative techniques. This essay analyses the specific quote, “I can hear it…water that brandy. for gods sake, sharpen up!” (Drewe, 1991, p. 142), focusing on Drewe’s use of narrative voice to create meaning and shape the reader’s response. Drawing from a literary studies perspective, the analysis will explore the type of voice employed, how a different voice might alter the impact, and what the quote reveals about Ned Kelly’s character. By examining these elements, the essay highlights Drewe’s contribution to Australian literature, where narrative innovation often reinterprets national myths (Gaile, 2001). Key arguments will address the intimacy of the first-person voice, its thematic implications, and broader interpretive consequences.
The Nature of Drewe’s Narrative Voice
Drewe employs a first-person narrative voice in “Our Sunshine,” presented as Ned Kelly’s own fragmented and introspective monologue. This voice is characterised by a stream-of-consciousness style, blending colloquial Australian vernacular with vivid, sensory details. In the quote, “I can hear it…water that brandy. for gods sake, sharpen up!” Ned appears to be in a delirious state, possibly during his final moments or under duress, hallucinating sounds and issuing abrupt commands. The ellipses and imperative tone (“sharpen up!”) convey a sense of urgency and disorientation, mimicking the chaotic inner world of a man on the brink of death (Drewe, 1991). This technique creates meaning by immersing the reader directly in Ned’s psyche, fostering empathy and immediacy. As McLaren (1996) notes in his analysis of Australian historical fiction, such a voice humanises historical figures, transforming Kelly from a distant legend into a relatable, flawed individual. Indeed, the informal language—lacking capitalisation and proper punctuation—enhances authenticity, shaping the reader’s response to perceive Kelly not as a mythic hero but as a vulnerable human under pressure. Furthermore, this voice underscores themes of rebellion and isolation, common in postcolonial Australian literature, where narrators often grapple with identity and authority (Gaile, 2001).
Implications of Alternative Narrative Voices
If Drewe had opted for a third-person omniscient voice instead, the quote’s impact would change significantly, potentially distancing the reader from Ned’s emotional turmoil. A third-person perspective might describe the scene objectively, such as “Ned heard the sound and muttered about watering the brandy,” which could reduce the raw intensity and make the narrative feel more detached and analytical. This shift would alter the meaning, emphasising historical events over personal experience, possibly leading readers to view Kelly as a mere subject of study rather than a compelling protagonist (McLaren, 1996). For instance, in contrast to Peter Carey’s “True History of the Kelly Gang” (2000), which also uses first-person but in epistolary form, Drewe’s choice avoids such structuring, allowing for a more fluid, impressionistic flow. Arguably, a second-person voice (“You hear it…”) could heighten immersion but might feel contrived in a historical context, disrupting the authenticity Drewe aims for. Therefore, the first-person voice is pivotal in shaping a response that encourages critical reflection on Kelly’s legend, revealing how narrative form influences interpretation in literature.
Revelations About Ned Kelly’s Character
Through this narrative voice, the quote reveals Ned Kelly as a multifaceted figure: resilient yet fragile, defiant yet humanised. The auditory hallucination (“I can hear it”) suggests paranoia or injury-induced delirium, exposing vulnerability beneath his outlaw bravado. The command to “sharpen up” implies a lingering sharpness of mind, even in chaos, reflecting Kelly’s historical reputation as a cunning bushranger who challenged colonial authority (Drewe, 1991). This portrayal aligns with broader literary depictions of Kelly as a symbol of anti-establishment sentiment in Australia, yet Drewe’s voice adds nuance by highlighting personal frailties, such as reliance on alcohol (“water that brandy”) as a coping mechanism. As Gaile (2001) argues, such revelations critique the romanticised Kelly myth, prompting readers to question national heroes. Typically, this shapes a response of sympathy mixed with critical evaluation, encouraging students of literature to consider how voice constructs character depth in biographical fiction.
Conclusion
In summary, Drewe’s first-person, stream-of-consciousness narrative voice in the analysed quote from “Our Sunshine” creates profound meaning by immersing readers in Ned Kelly’s inner world, evoking empathy and highlighting themes of vulnerability and rebellion. A shift to a different voice, such as third-person, would likely diminish this intimacy, altering reader engagement and interpretive depth. Ultimately, this reveals Kelly as a complex anti-hero, challenging simplistic historical narratives. The implications extend to Australian literature, where innovative voices like Drewe’s invite reevaluation of cultural icons, fostering a more nuanced understanding of identity and history. This analysis demonstrates the power of narrative technique in shaping literary responses, with potential for further exploration in comparative studies.
References
- Drewe, R. (1991) Our Sunshine. Picador.
- Gaile, A. (2001) ‘The “Contrary” Continent: The Supernatural in Australian Fiction’, Ariel: A Review of International English Literature, 32(2), pp. 133-152. University of Calgary Press.
- McLaren, J. (1996) Australian Literature: An Historical Introduction. Longman Cheshire.
(Word count: 812)
