What do you think?
Rate this book
The Afterlife of George Cartwright
Book by Steffler, John
280 pages, Mass Market Paperback
First published January 1, 1992
2 people are currently reading
92 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
May 9, 2014
Having read the classic Ambrose Bierce story "An Occurance at Owl Creek Bridge" in university, a story told backwards, I was intrigued to find this book in an airport bookstore and discover it too was a story told backwards. It is an historical novel based on the near-impossibly rugged settling of Northern Labrador. A very satisfying read, both in terms of the structure and style.
October 25, 2025
"Looking back, men like Cartwright are ridiculous and naive, blind and stupid, even evil; they confirm our incredulity towards the “master narratives” of history. Yet, in a time of indolent cynicism and vicious self-interest, turning to the past with self-righteous indignation can mask the moral emptiness of the present and distract from trespasses yet to be named."
- NOVEL'S AFTERWORD BY RENÉE HULAN
- NOVEL'S AFTERWORD BY RENÉE HULAN
August 16, 2008
I did not get around to reading this one until over a decade after its publication (even though I owned it since just after its release. It's an interesting book in many ways - traditional and postmodern (to use those terms loosely) at the same time.
The author's note at the end of the novel explains best what the story attempts to do - he was trying to capture the flavor and sense of exploration and adventure available during the eighteenth and nineteenth century as the northern part of the Americas were colonised. To do this, he tried to balance actual exerpts from George Cartwright's journal (yes, he really lived) with a narrative that filled in the blanks and made for a good story. I think he succeeded.
The novel is structured as a combination of three types of narration. Third person 'objective' narration of events (both in the 'present' and the past), George's journal entries after his death (observations of the contemporary world when he encounters it as well as recollections of his earlier life), and George's 'original' journal entries from when he was alive. The last of these would seem to be the most objective since they are descriptions of his actions as he undertakes them, but as we discover near the end of the novel, he published these journal entries. While he claims he was scrupulous in not changing them, he also reveals that he made up almost half of the journal entries that he originally published. He returned to London from Labrador in 1779 but in his published journal, he has Labrador entires dating till a 'retirement' in 1786.
The concept and construction are novel and interesting, but the writing also is as well. At times it reads drily like a journal, but the jumping from narrative form to form and the simple adventure of following George are enough to keep you interested and reading, even though George as a character is not necessarily very interesting.
The author's note at the end of the novel explains best what the story attempts to do - he was trying to capture the flavor and sense of exploration and adventure available during the eighteenth and nineteenth century as the northern part of the Americas were colonised. To do this, he tried to balance actual exerpts from George Cartwright's journal (yes, he really lived) with a narrative that filled in the blanks and made for a good story. I think he succeeded.
The novel is structured as a combination of three types of narration. Third person 'objective' narration of events (both in the 'present' and the past), George's journal entries after his death (observations of the contemporary world when he encounters it as well as recollections of his earlier life), and George's 'original' journal entries from when he was alive. The last of these would seem to be the most objective since they are descriptions of his actions as he undertakes them, but as we discover near the end of the novel, he published these journal entries. While he claims he was scrupulous in not changing them, he also reveals that he made up almost half of the journal entries that he originally published. He returned to London from Labrador in 1779 but in his published journal, he has Labrador entires dating till a 'retirement' in 1786.
The concept and construction are novel and interesting, but the writing also is as well. At times it reads drily like a journal, but the jumping from narrative form to form and the simple adventure of following George are enough to keep you interested and reading, even though George as a character is not necessarily very interesting.
September 21, 2021
This is a good addition to a Can Lit library only limited with its somewhat stilted construction. The narrative has momentum and it is a very credible piece of historical fiction. It is hard to understand why the author added in the protagonist's afterlife. It feels unnecessary and contrived. Themes of European contact with the indigenous communities and exploitation of natural resources are dealt with deftly. The allure of the rugged coast of Labrador in the late 1700s is compelling to anyone smitten by allure of remote wilderness.
November 20, 2016
This was a pretty decent story of Canadian settlement and the problems with colonialism. I like the questioning of narratives especially when it comes to accepting historical documents as truth, even though they are being written by people with biases in a certain context with possibly something to gain from them. I can't see myself thinking of this book for long into the future but it's definitely got a lot of value in it.
January 20, 2013
Something a little different. It gets off to a very slow start but improves once the characters reach Labrador. It was difficult to get through. I read it for book club. I don't think I would have finished it if it had have been read for enjoyment and I can't say that I gained anything from completing it other than a greater understanding of what smallpox looked like.
November 6, 2025
"'So, you were a soldier all along.'"
Okay wait so I actually quite liked this. Perhaps if I lived a different life, I would have studied history, because the books I've read that embellish historical figures and/or explore the nature and recording of history have really been hitting guys.
Alright so very intriguing premise, you have a ghost (OMG HE'S DEAD?? NO!!) who reflects on his life and experiences his own sense of being haunted. This is such an interesting way to reflect on, specifically, the effects of colonialism, which of course continues to shape many aspects of the present. But it's also just the general idea of only being able to see the effects of your actions when you are no longer Fully Yourself anymore — in this case, when you have died and seen how the times have changed throughout the decades.
I think I am also a fan of the vignette style of storytelling where you get pieces of scenes rather than a seamless flow of events. The narrative is fragmented and mostly chronological, though time and narrative interjections work differently. Steffler relies mostly on Cartwright's real life writing of course, but he also makes shit up and adds shit. Okay I guess he doesn't make shit up, but he kind of gestures toward what Cartwright didn't write and imaginatively fills in the spaces there. I really like this mix of real!Cartwright's documented fact/reality and the potential (or probable) fact/reality Steffler writes, like yasss I love canon compliant fics.
That being said, George Cartwright really interested me. I did not know anything about Cartwright prior to reading this book, but Steffler's depiction of him was not what I was expecting. Like, I knew that Cartwright — being the Classic Colonialist 18th-Century British Man Wants To Find Himself And (mostly) Make Ca$h Money In Canada — does some nefarious shit. And well yes! he does. I do like, however, that Steffler does not set out to make Cartwright a heartless monster, despite his rather monstrous actions. I felt bad for him at times yes, but maybe it's just because I feel so so bad when people fail or become stagnant lol. But yeah, Cartwright really came to life while I was reading.
The quotation above is one of my favs in the book (of which there are many btw Steffler was actually cooking with grease i gotta be real). It's short and unassuming, but the context surrounding it in the story sums up Cartwright so well, it made me audibly go "ooooh...." It conveys the ideas of intention, identity, and power that prominently circulate throughout the novel.
Four. Really like how Steffler uses Cartwright to look at 18th century colonial and empirical expansion, destruction, and ignorance, especially considering how relatively unremarkable real!Cartwright was/is. I wonder why he chose him. In any case, the novel was published in 1992 so I'm just wondering how Cartwright, able to peek into the present during his time in the afterlife, felt about Diana and Charles announcing their formal separation that year, like did he see it coming? His bitchass probably sympathized with Charles and the royal family too smh
Okay wait so I actually quite liked this. Perhaps if I lived a different life, I would have studied history, because the books I've read that embellish historical figures and/or explore the nature and recording of history have really been hitting guys.
Alright so very intriguing premise, you have a ghost (OMG HE'S DEAD?? NO!!) who reflects on his life and experiences his own sense of being haunted. This is such an interesting way to reflect on, specifically, the effects of colonialism, which of course continues to shape many aspects of the present. But it's also just the general idea of only being able to see the effects of your actions when you are no longer Fully Yourself anymore — in this case, when you have died and seen how the times have changed throughout the decades.
I think I am also a fan of the vignette style of storytelling where you get pieces of scenes rather than a seamless flow of events. The narrative is fragmented and mostly chronological, though time and narrative interjections work differently. Steffler relies mostly on Cartwright's real life writing of course, but he also makes shit up and adds shit. Okay I guess he doesn't make shit up, but he kind of gestures toward what Cartwright didn't write and imaginatively fills in the spaces there. I really like this mix of real!Cartwright's documented fact/reality and the potential (or probable) fact/reality Steffler writes, like yasss I love canon compliant fics.
That being said, George Cartwright really interested me. I did not know anything about Cartwright prior to reading this book, but Steffler's depiction of him was not what I was expecting. Like, I knew that Cartwright — being the Classic Colonialist 18th-Century British Man Wants To Find Himself And (mostly) Make Ca$h Money In Canada — does some nefarious shit. And well yes! he does. I do like, however, that Steffler does not set out to make Cartwright a heartless monster, despite his rather monstrous actions. I felt bad for him at times yes, but maybe it's just because I feel so so bad when people fail or become stagnant lol. But yeah, Cartwright really came to life while I was reading.
The quotation above is one of my favs in the book (of which there are many btw Steffler was actually cooking with grease i gotta be real). It's short and unassuming, but the context surrounding it in the story sums up Cartwright so well, it made me audibly go "ooooh...." It conveys the ideas of intention, identity, and power that prominently circulate throughout the novel.
Four. Really like how Steffler uses Cartwright to look at 18th century colonial and empirical expansion, destruction, and ignorance, especially considering how relatively unremarkable real!Cartwright was/is. I wonder why he chose him. In any case, the novel was published in 1992 so I'm just wondering how Cartwright, able to peek into the present during his time in the afterlife, felt about Diana and Charles announcing their formal separation that year, like did he see it coming? His bitchass probably sympathized with Charles and the royal family too smh
October 5, 2025
Mi primer acercamiento a la literatura canadiense, por así llamarlo. Siempre encuentro satisfactorio cuando los agujeros de las historias se completan con una ficción que pretende no serla, es como un consuelo a la verdad. Una historia de las ambiciones de la época, en la guerra y en las colonias; en un punto quise sentir el frio paisaje de Labrador, y admito coincidir con el primigenio impulso civilizador de Cartwright al relacionarse con los inuit, interesantes referencias etnológicas. Una buena novela.
October 10, 2019
Read for ENG 2101: Canadian Literature I.
March 31, 2013
One of my used bookstore finds. A surprisingly engrossing book about a man consumed by his own ambitions in a distant and fascinating time and place. What is left after you lose that what you never really had?
November 20, 2007
An interesting look at the early colonisation and exploration of Canada.
Want to read
June 21, 2011NCL.2006-10-01
June 4, 2015
It was okay, a bit heavy handed with the points the author was trying to make. A full review to come.
January 20, 2012
Had some lovely passages, but I thought the overall effect to be a bit much. Full review later on.
December 24, 2014
“The Afterlife of George Cartwright” was the prize of my Canadian literature course required reading list.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews