It feelslikethere’smorethanonelegacyat stakeinTheEulogy
(2018),JanineHosking’sdocumentaryaboutGeoffreyTozer.
Most immediately,the film aims to bring the life, work and
legacyof the Australianpianistand composer– whomit largely
presentsasbeingunfairlyneglectedbythelocalartsscene
despitehisnumerousaccomplishments– backintothepublic
consciousness.ButTheEulogyalso drawsheavilyon the con-
nectionofformerprimeministerPaulKeatingtoTozer,particu-
larly in the form of the titular forty-five-minuteeulogythat he
deliveredat Tozer’sfuneralin October2009.^1 Addedto thisis the
on-screenguidingpresenceofcelebratedAustralianconductor
and music educatorRichardGill, who died in October2018.
Hoskingexplicitlyasksustoconsiderthequestion‘What
went wrong?’with regardto Tozer’slife and career;after all, he
was, Keatingremindsus, ‘quicklydubbeda “musicalgenius”
by Australia’sforemostmusicians’as a youngboy. Yet we’re
also left to ponderfor ourselvesthe associatedquestionof ex-
actly how and why we shouldvalue someonelike Tozer, who
was certainlyan extraordinarilytalentedartist. And we’re left to
ponderfor ourselvesexactlyhow and why we shouldvalue the
musiche created– a questionthat we may deludeourselves,
when we’re not directlyfaced with it, into thinkingis obvious.
The elusivenessof graspingthe notionof musical‘genius’
is what makesTheEulogyintriguingbeyondstraightforward
biography,even as it perhapsfails to fully reckonwith this
difficultunderlyingproblem.Its primarysubject,Tozer, is cap-
tured with vivid affectionand interest,alongsideexcellent
archival research and commentary by Gill. But it’s the music
itself – what it is and how we shouldrespondto it – and the
indeterminateidea of geniusthat are never quite definedor
presentedfordirectconsideration.We’retoldregularlyby
many intervieweesjust howgoodTozer was, but the film
rarely puts us in a positionto comprehendwhat that actu-
ally meansfor the musicianor for his appreciators.
AsGillleadsusthroughelementsofthepianist’slife,
TozerandKeating’scombinedpresencealsosummonsa
tensionbetweenpoliticsand music.It’s anotherconnection
that Hoskinglikewisenever quite exploreswith the nuance
it demands,whichleavesTheEulogywith a numberof un-
exploredthreadsrelatingtoclass,culturalcapitalandthe
fundingof the arts – both then and now – that unavoidably
appearone way or anotherwhen consideringan Australian
LaborParty (ALP) prime minister’sfierce publicand financ-
ial advocacyfor a classicalmusician.It may be for the best
that the film doesn’tstray too overtlyinto this area –The
Eulogyis,afterall,primarilyaboutTozerhimselfandneedn’t
necessarilyengagewith a larger argument.Nevertheless,it’s
Keating’seulogythatframestheportraitofTozerthat’spre-
sentedhere, and that bringswith it a numberof resonances
thataresometimesredirectedratherthanconsidered in all
of their muddysocialand culturalcomplexities.
Similarly,Tozer’smusicaltalent is somethingthat the film
isn’t quite able to wrest away from being an abstractconcept
that’stangledupin hagiographicstorytelling.We’reconfron-
ted with the disconnectbetweenTozer’sevidenttalent and his
lack of reputation in the contemporary Australian arts scene,We’reconfrontedwiththedisconnectbetween
Tozer’sevidenttalentandhislackofreputation
inthecontemporaryAustralianartsscene,
butit’sdifficulttoreallyknowwhattomake
ofthis,especiallyinanerawhentheideaof
‘genius’ is not necessarily particularly potent.http://www.metromagazine.com.au | © ATOM | Metro Magazine 201• 93