What do you think?
Rate this book
The second chair
It is 1963, and everything seems fine for the beginning of the academic year in Sydney’s new university. But the sudden death of Professor Bill Gilbey sets in train a political intrigue with disturbing implications
For the suddenly elevated Head of Sociology, Richard Hogarth, Gilbey’s now vacant chair has to be filled, but individuals in and outside the campus have other ideas. The medicos see an opportunity to move the chair to Medicine, and Hogarth finds that what seemed straightforward is actually quite complicated. And in time the security service becomes involved as suspicions of communist infiltration arise.
And behind the public posturings the private problems of the participants emerge to influence and confuse the sequence of events. This novel of campus intrigue was originally published in 1977 by Angus and Robertson, and was compared favourably to the work of C. P Snow in England.
For the suddenly elevated Head of Sociology, Richard Hogarth, Gilbey’s now vacant chair has to be filled, but individuals in and outside the campus have other ideas. The medicos see an opportunity to move the chair to Medicine, and Hogarth finds that what seemed straightforward is actually quite complicated. And in time the security service becomes involved as suspicions of communist infiltration arise.
And behind the public posturings the private problems of the participants emerge to influence and confuse the sequence of events. This novel of campus intrigue was originally published in 1977 by Angus and Robertson, and was compared favourably to the work of C. P Snow in England.
Hardcover
Published January 1, 1977
3 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 of 1 review
February 26, 2024
One of Australia's more enjoyable 20th century campus novels. While Aitkin's contemporaries, 'Death of an Old Goat' (Robert Barnard, 1974), 'Campus' (Peter James, 1985), 'Pushed from the Wings' (Ross Fitzgerald, 1986), 'Blair: A Novel' (John A. Scott, 1989), 'The Wildlife Reserve' (Laurie Clancy, 1994), satirise academia, crafting outlandish characters and unbelievable shenanigans, Aitkin prefers a more realistic, and thus far more compelling, plot. I barely finished the others, but this one was comparatively engaging.
What happens when the department's second chair dies?
When every other university department has only one chair, can you justify the replacement?
What happens when the most outstanding candidate is denounced in the press as a Communist?
'The Second Chair' plays into the campus novel stereotype of academics having affairs with one another's wives, but this is used to add stakes to the protagonist's (Professor Hogarth) campaign to convince the other Council members to vote for the discredited candidate (Greenhill). Affairs are a cliché in the genre, but I thought it was used to interesting effect in 'The Second Chair' for humanising Hogarth and his wife by showing how they ignore rather than seek help with their sexual compatibility. Ironically, Helen is a go-getter in life, but is at a loss to improve her skills or confidence in the bedroom, and Hogarth is a follower in life, but partially initiates his affair with Jacquette. As the Council's decision meeting looms closer, someone sends a poison-pen letter to Helen about the affair, causing them to confront the issue before the voting commences.
The opening scene when Gilbey dies is dramatic, and perhaps a bit unbelievable, but functions well as an inciting incident that thrusts the reluctant Hogarth into action. In his journey, he learns to articulate his belief that in order to remain truth-seeking educational institutions, universities should only take into account a candidate's scholarship and teaching experience, not their race, gender, sexuality, or, as is the case in the novel, their political stance. Despite the ending, the books sounding call remains clear.
The novel also provides some explanation as to the communist fear explored, but unexplained, in other 20th century campus novels. At the very least, the novel is helpful for understanding the communist panic following the Petrov affair, and the dual separation and dependence of universities on the Prime Minister to favour higher education.
The descriptions of meetings and staff members have many parallels to academic departments and university interactions today. It's a novel that ages well, and shows that despite technological advancements, many of the day-to-day concerns of Australian universities have not changed. We still look for the 'star factor' (academic celebrity) in employment (even if we don’t admit it). We still juggle unsustainable loads of teaching, admin, and marking, getting in the way of research and publication. We still feel like we're somehow behind the prestigious Oxbridge and Ivy League universities and have to work extra hard to persuade exceptional scholars to make the move to Australia.
An enjoyable story about the junction between academic and social politics in Australia.
What happens when the department's second chair dies?
When every other university department has only one chair, can you justify the replacement?
What happens when the most outstanding candidate is denounced in the press as a Communist?
'The Second Chair' plays into the campus novel stereotype of academics having affairs with one another's wives, but this is used to add stakes to the protagonist's (Professor Hogarth) campaign to convince the other Council members to vote for the discredited candidate (Greenhill). Affairs are a cliché in the genre, but I thought it was used to interesting effect in 'The Second Chair' for humanising Hogarth and his wife by showing how they ignore rather than seek help with their sexual compatibility. Ironically, Helen is a go-getter in life, but is at a loss to improve her skills or confidence in the bedroom, and Hogarth is a follower in life, but partially initiates his affair with Jacquette. As the Council's decision meeting looms closer, someone sends a poison-pen letter to Helen about the affair, causing them to confront the issue before the voting commences.
The opening scene when Gilbey dies is dramatic, and perhaps a bit unbelievable, but functions well as an inciting incident that thrusts the reluctant Hogarth into action. In his journey, he learns to articulate his belief that in order to remain truth-seeking educational institutions, universities should only take into account a candidate's scholarship and teaching experience, not their race, gender, sexuality, or, as is the case in the novel, their political stance. Despite the ending, the books sounding call remains clear.
The novel also provides some explanation as to the communist fear explored, but unexplained, in other 20th century campus novels. At the very least, the novel is helpful for understanding the communist panic following the Petrov affair, and the dual separation and dependence of universities on the Prime Minister to favour higher education.
The descriptions of meetings and staff members have many parallels to academic departments and university interactions today. It's a novel that ages well, and shows that despite technological advancements, many of the day-to-day concerns of Australian universities have not changed. We still look for the 'star factor' (academic celebrity) in employment (even if we don’t admit it). We still juggle unsustainable loads of teaching, admin, and marking, getting in the way of research and publication. We still feel like we're somehow behind the prestigious Oxbridge and Ivy League universities and have to work extra hard to persuade exceptional scholars to make the move to Australia.
An enjoyable story about the junction between academic and social politics in Australia.
Displaying 1 of 1 review