NEW z_EALAND STUDIES

first hand accounts of their personal the same without )a net' helps on the origins of his early radical­ experiences li ving and working emphasise the simple humanity ism provides a sneak preview of the with him. , who underlying his beliefs and decisions. major biography of Fraser which he served in with Fraser during The other chapters are more began and Michael Basset! (another his last term as Prime Minister, talks conventional historical accounts. contributor to this book) will finish. of Fraser the politician. Colin Some of them rely heavily on Peter Fra ser: Master Politician is a Aikman and Tom Larkin, officials reports written by one contempo­ pleasant synthesis of a wide variety who travelled with him on diplo­ rary source being brought to light. of perspectives on Fraser and a very matic missions overseas, describe This is especially noticeable in useful addition to New Zealand's Fraser the statesman. Alice Kemp Michael Ashby's contribution on political and historical literature. It Fraser, 's grand-step­ Fraser's foreign policy and Brian could be used as a source for daughter, depicts Fraser the family Easton's rather scrappy chapter on research on a specific aspect of his man (according to her, the Prime Fraser and the development of the career but, unusually for the genre, Minister of New Zealand had one nation-building state. There is a it is very easy to read. In portraying gla ss eye. Imagine that being kept a well-balanced presentation of the man it is in total greater than the secret today 1). Supporting this is a Fraser's accomplishments in sum of its parts. It should appeal to chapter by Hilary Stace noting the separate chapters describing his both the specialist and the general contribution made by Fraser's wife contribution to education policy reader.

./, COMMENTARY by Brian Easton

Remembering Peter Fraser hardly touched by the fact that Lee seems to have been a monetary This paper was originally given at a New Zea land Book Council seminar 011 'Peter reformer rather than a socialist). My Frn ser: Master Politicia11', 29 July, 1998. attitude- indeed that of much of HERE IS AN EASTON family My father seems to have dis­ my generation- was even more T tradition that when Peter tanced himself from Fraser. I think formed by what was seen to be a Fraser was a carpenter in , it was probably the expulsion of second betrayal, the he stayed with my great-grandfa­ John A. Lee from the . referendum. But as David Grant ther w hen he came to Wellington on Erik Olssen's contribution to Peter shows, Fraser was never a classic Red Fed business. Perhaps it is an Frnser: Master Politician is histori­ conscientious objector despite being exaggeration: he might have stayed ca ll y accurate- distinguishing itself jailed during the First World War. once, or called in on a visit. The from much of the other commen­ And to round the in tergenera tional connection seems to have con­ tary. Perhaps historicity has long story off, I asked my son 'who was tinued, for the tradition claims that been irrelevant, for the expulsion Peter Fraser?'. He replied 'is this a as Prime Minister Fraser attended has the mythical status of the trick question?', thought a bit, and my grandfather's funeral. Fraser moment when Labour chose a path asked eau tiousl y 'was he a Prime was a regular attender of funerals of cooperation with capitalism, Minister?'. Thus in five generations so that is possible too. rather than of (a myth of the Easton family Fraser cycled

26 Vol 8 No 2 September 1998 N E \YI :z_E A L A N D S T U D I E S

from being an almost unheard of moves from the status of a living good history of the Treasury which non-entity with potential, to an politician to an historical one. He is is likely to shed further light on the almost forgotten entity of realised not alone: we have recently had central role of Bernard Ash win, and potential. published important biographies of the interaction with his ministers. There are some inconsistencies John Ba llance and Edward Stafford, The second issue is the tension in the Easton family accounts of plus the conference essays on Keith between Fraser, the cold warrior, Fraser. Even my generation knew Holyoake: Towards a Political Biogra­ and the supporters of nuclear there was an anomaly, for we phy. Of the four, the Stout Centre disarmament. I can only offer my described him as 'our greatest has been proudly associated with generation's perspective here. It Minister of Educa tion'. We resolved three, plus the forthcoming study of saw nuclear weapons as so funda­ it, by saying that it was really . (In passing we mentally changing the nature of Clarence Beeby, although Bill desperately need a decent biogra­ international politics, that tradi­ Renwick's essay shows he had phy of Bill Massey and also a new tional great power rivalry, such as independently come to his educa­ one on Dick Seddon. And despite that post-war between the Soviet tional views before he met Beeb. My Judith Basset's study, we need to re­ and the US, was no longer relevant. views were further disturbed when evaluate ). Let me However, nuclear arms interacted I attended a Book Council lecture in finish by listing three issues which so strongly with the cold war, that it the early 1980s, in w hich Michael need further consideration. has never been possible to separate King read the first chapter of what The first I deal with briefly is the two debates -or not possible will be the Bassett-King biography. that covered by my essay: economic until the end of the Soviet Empire (If the rest is only half as good as policy and economic performance. from 1989. The question that Fraser that chapter it is going to be a great I could not really find any evidence poses for me is: if he had been my book). Also attending was a number for Fraser's economics leadership. generation, what would have been of ex-diplomats, who were there to On the basis of what I have seen his foreign policy stance? The ensure that their hero was not mis­ I am inclined to think he was led - import is that he was no more, nor represented. Fraser a 'hero', a foreign he took advice. That can not be less, moral than we were, but he affairs 'hero'? Wasn't he a cold quite right, because he had a was applying his morality in a warrior? There are several essays in conservative economic stance by the different situation. Or, was his the book w hich contribute to my time he became a minister, more so foreign policy vision laced more understanding Fraser as a foreign than Lee for instance. Frustratingly with a Realpolitik? What would be policy moralist. I am especially glad the period of the 1940s is just his position today on, say, East the book republished the Alistair beyond that of modern economic Timor? As such questions are Mclntosh paper, which deserves to history scholarship, because the hypothetical and a-historical, and I be more widely known, while the data base only gets reliable from the am not looking for slick answers, others all support his account. mid-1950s. Yet the economic like Fraser would have been a Fraser's contribution to the forma­ performance of New Zealand under 'rogernome' had he led the Labour tion of the Trusteeship council is Fraser (and Savage) was one of the government in the 1980s. What I am one of those proud moments in most outstanding, challenged only concerned with is the standoff New Zealand's fo reign policy by the Seddon period. The available between the two sides of our history, along with Bill Sutch's part works are disappointingly inad­ foreign policy debate. I see in these in the foundation of UNICEF. Is equate: Jack Baker's War Economy is essays the possibility of using there a book on 'great moments in the best. 's Wafter Nash Fraser as a way into understanding New Zealand's foreign policy'? is frustratingly light on economic the confl ict between the two views, In summary, Peter Fraser: Master policy. My guess is that the best and even reconciling them. Politician, is a valuable step towards chance we have of recovering the My third issue is an uncomfort­ a re-evaluation of Fraser as he economics of the period would be a able one, but it must be faced. There

V o / 8 No Septem ber 19 98 27 N E W z_E A L A N D S T U D I E S

is nothing in the book which level of political thuggery. Thus is fou nded on his earlier one? changes my generation's image of Fraser's justified, more than that of I know my family inheritance Fraser as a first class politica l thug, his successor Sid Holland? Moreo­ from the Eastons, even though I who used his power brutally where ver, beneath it all, there was a more knew neither my grandfather nor he thought it was in the best liberal story. Conscientious objec­ great-grandfather. But I know also I interests of the nation as judged by tors were treated more tolerantly in have an intellectual inheritance himself. It was an image symbolised the Second World War than in the from Peter Fraser. I remain unsure by the Lee expulsion, by the con­ First, apparently partly as a result of what it is, but this book gives me scription referendum, and by some Fraser. 'Guilt' snorted my genera­ clues, and stimulates me to think of the industrial relations disputes, tion. But were we not reared on the about them. Which is all we should but there are related minor other Fraser-Beeby principles? Do we not ask of a book. ,.. incidents of his life handed down support the cultural life he pro­ from other fathers to other sons. moted? Did he not detest racism as BRIAN EASTON is n well-kllowll They could be explained by the we do? Was he not almost a femi­ writer and COIIIIIlelltntor 011 eco11omics. circumstances. Here was Fraser nist as much as a man could be of leading a country at war, and he his time, perhaps as a part of love Notes had to deal with various dissenters and respect for that strong woman The presentation text included: 'He may even have lived in sin (as was the quaint including Leeites and communists Janet Fraser? (Hillary Stace's terminology of his day) with janet before (although this latter element is still contribution is another jewel in this her divorce came through'. However shadowy). War leadership involves book). And was not our commit- Hillary Stace assures me th at subsequent research (based on addresses) almost d esperate measures, and so a higher ment for a moral foreign policy certainly rules that possibility out.

:.:£ BOOK ~VIEW by Edmu11d Bohn11 Farewell Colonialism: The New Zealand International Exhibition, , 1906-07 John Mansfield Thomson (ed), The Dunmore Press, Palmerston North, 1998, $39.95

HIS HANDSOMELY general histories. Perhaps if it had Our first major international T presented and superbly been held in Auckland that would event, and a significant tourist illustrated book of twelve essays by not have been the case, but at least attraction, was directly inspired by eleven different contributors had its after this book such an ex traordi­ and modelled on the greatest and genesis in the Stout Research Centre nary achievement will be ignored most influential of 19th- century 1995 conference on the Christchurch only by the most crass of future exhibitions, as John Mansfield Exhibition. historians. Promoted by Seddon to Thomson makes so admirably clear Surprisingly, given the signifi­ display to the world New Zealand's in the first brief essay: '"That cance of the Exhibition in our social 'distinctiveness and imminent Enchanted Pile": A Note on the and cultural history, that conference greatness', the exhibition trium­ Great Exhibition at the Crystal and this publication seem to have phantly celebrated the successes of Palace in 1851'. Jock Phillips, in been the first to have studied the an emergent nation and was visited 'Exhibiting Ourselves: The Exhibi­ event in any satisfactory detail, for and enjoyed by nearly two million tion and National Identity' follows hitherto it has been comprehen­ people- nearly twice New Zea­ with an analysis of the event as the sively ignored in most of our land's entire population in 1906. 'national self-definition' of a young

28 Vol 8 No September 1998