Lunch with Mussolini

by Derek Hansen

  ‘Early on in his story, Lucio made the point that all war is an atrocity. The bombing of Guernica, the shooting of the Jewish girl by Dietrich and so on. The dropping of stick grenades and Molotov cocktails by partisans on trucks crowded with troops is an atrocity. Running over refugee columns in tanks is an atrocity. The bombing of innocent women and children in cities is an atrocity. All war is an atrocity and one of the biggest atrocities of all was the bombing of Dresden. Lucio has spared us little detail about that particular event so it serves no point to go back over it. But let me ask you this, who paid for the crime of Dresden? Does anybody doubt that it was a crime?’ Milos looked around the table but nobody chose to contradict him. ‘Perhaps Gancio is right. Perhaps it is outrageous for us to sit here in judgement at all. What is the basis of judgement? What constitutes a war crime? It seems to be that criminality in war is determined by the victor. If Hitler had somehow won the war, doubtless Bomber Harris would have been hanged instead of having a statue erected in his honour. If Hitler had won we would not be here now sitting in judgement of Friedrich Eigenwill. He would have returned home a hero. A sad and embittered one, maybe, but nonetheless a hero.

  ‘In light of some of the atrocities that took place during the war, the shooting of the women in Ravello is a piddly affair. Bear in mind, also, that Friedrich would have been perfectly within his rights to have ordered not one shooting in Ravello but several. He had ample cause for ordering reprisals. Lucio made the point that many of the women who were shot were mourning husbands and sons killed in the ambush. Those women were supporting and giving comfort to the partisans. Under the laws of the army of occupation, that was an offence punishable by death. There were posters everywhere informing the populace of this. Arguably, Friedrich was simply enforcing the law as he understood it, even though the event that triggered the reprisal was of a personal rather than military nature.

  ‘I don’t believe that Friedrich is a bad man. On the contrary, I would regard him as a very decent, kind, thoughtful and fundamentally moral human being. His reluctance to hunt down Jews is further evidence of that. He is simply a man who cracked momentarily under extreme pressure and made a wrong decision. I believe he has suffered the consequences of that decision ever since.

  ‘I will make one final point. That is to do with Colombina’s motivation. She is not seeking retribution for the death of her school friend Giuseppina Cerasuolo or any of the other six women. No! She is seeking revenge for the killing of her mother. Did Friedrich Eigenwill deliberately set out to kill Maddalena Ortelli? No! He didn’t even know she was in the line up. Had he known, would he have shot her? Of course not! He shot her by accident. Yes, by accident. It was one of those unfortunate accidents that occur every day in a war. There was no premeditation. It was terrible, tragic but not unforgivable. That is my point. What Friedrich did under the circumstances that he did it, is not unforgivable. For my part, I forgive him.’

  The four friends turned to look at the blind man who held the casting vote. He alone now held the fate of Friedrich Eigenwill in his hands.

  ‘Well, Ramon, we are tied two-two.’ Lucio began to turn the screws. ‘How do you vote? You have heard all the arguments and must have an opinion of your own. The final decision rests with you.’

  ‘God above!’ he hissed. ‘Do you realise what you are asking me to do?’

  ‘We are asking no more of you than we’ve asked of ourselves.’

  ‘Not so! Everything rests with me. His life is in my hands! The four of you have negated each other. You have left it to me to decide for you. The blood will be on my hands!’

  ‘Does that mean you side with Neil and myself? Does that mean Friedrich must be made to face up to his crime and pay for it?’

  ‘No, it bloody well does not!’ Ramon’s shout startled the diners nearby who had already begun to cast nervous glances in their direction.

  ‘May I suggest we all keep our voices down?’ Milos addressed the whole table, reluctant to single out Ramon as the culprit. Ramon was under enough pressure as it was. ‘We don’t want to make the whole of the restaurant privy to our discussions, no?’

  ‘Sweet Jesus, I don’t want to do this.’

  ‘Ramon, you have no choice. Remember, whichever way you vote you will only be adding your vote to two that have already gone before. It is a shared responsibility, not yours alone.’

  ‘Bullshit, Lucio. It is my decision and you know damn well it is.’

  ‘Cut the shit, Ramon,’ Neil snapped. ‘Cut this dying swan routine. Just give us your vote and we can all go home and kick the dog or whatever. Show some guts.’

  ‘Yes, Ramon, it is time you cast your vote.’ Ramon turned towards Gancio, surprised by the harsh note in his voice. He’d expected support from Gancio at least and was dismayed to discover none would be forthcoming. He cupped his head in his hands, and ran his fingers over his face. His hands shook and his friends could not fail to notice.

  ‘I’d hoped I’d finished with all this sort of business when I left Argentina. But it seems otherwise. Let me say this, I’m not sure the concepts of guilt or innocence as we might understand them apply. It is like Milos said, who determines guilt in a war? Guilt seems to me a very arbitrary thing. It depends, for one thing, on which side the offender is on. Two people may commit identical acts but only one is deemed a crime. The comparison with Dresden is entirely appropriate. That was undoubtedly a crime against humanity. There was premeditation. There were no mitigating circumstances, at least none that amount to much. It seems to me that guilt is a personal thing. If my mother had been shot in the square at Ravello instead of Colombina’s, then Friedrich Eigenwill would always be guilty in my eyes and I would demand retribution. Time would forgive nothing. Equally, if my family had been killed in Dresden, I would demand retribution. But my mother was not shot in the square at Ravello, nor were my family killed in Dresden. I feel no personal loss. I can dismiss both events as atrocities of war among many atrocities. I feel perhaps that recriminations and retribution should end with the armistice. But Milos, you raised the issue of the Holocaust. How could retribution for that end with the armistice? The perpetrators of that should be hounded to their graves. So when does an atrocity justify retribution and when doesn’t it? Is it a simple matter of body count? The deaths of six million Jews matter but not the deaths of eight innocent women in Ravello? The issue of criminality in war is too big for us to decide. It is too simplistic to say that all crimes should be punished because all crimes will not be punished, because the definition of war crimes is not constant. But that really is not the issue. We have not been asked to decide on the overall issue of war crimes. We have been asked to help one person determine whether or not she is justified in seeking revenge on the man who killed her mother. If it had been my mother who was killed, I would demand retribution. I would demand that Friedrich Eigenwill be made to face up to his crime and the certainty of his death. So how can I possibly advise Colombina otherwise?’

  ‘No, Ramon! Don’t say it!’ Milos reached over and grabbed his friend’s arm.

  Ramon snatched his hand away. ‘Dear God Milos, do you think I am enjoying this? Don’t you think I wish there were some other way?’ He paused and dropped his chin on his chest. Seconds ticked away and became minutes, but still he did not raise his head. When he began to speak again, his voice was devoid of all life. Every syllable seemed reluctant to leave his mouth. ‘I don’t believe individuals are justified in taking the law into their hands. However inadequate our system is in dealing with things like this, it is our system and we should abide by it. Is Colombina justified in seeking revenge? Yes, she is. But should she? The answer is no. If she goes ahead with her plans she will not only break the law but become a murderer too. And she doesn’t deserve that. So my vote is split. Colombina is justified in taking her revenge but only within the framework of the law. I cannot sanction the death of Friedrich Eigenwill by her hand.’

  ‘That’s a cop-out Ramon, and you know it!’ Ne
il was almost out of his chair in anger. ‘You think you should let Colombina kill him but you haven’t got the guts to say so. You haven’t, have you?’

  Ramon remained silent in obvious distress but Neil was relentless. ‘You found him guilty. You say that Colombina is justified in exacting her revenge. That is all you have been asked to do. You have not been asked to decide whether or not we are right to sit in judgement or whether or not Colombina is right to be the agent of retribution. We discussed that earlier. We have a system of law and decided not to use it. We decided not to use it for three reasons: expense; the fact that the stress of a trial would probably kill the old man anyway; and, finally, his age virtually eliminates any possibility of him being brought to trial. He will die of old age first. No, we have gathered here to decide whether Colombina is justified in seeking retribution for the murder of her mother. How she exacts her revenge is her affair, and we only have Lucio’s word for that. All Colombina has asked us to do is examine the facts and weigh up any mitigating circumstances in his favour. We have done that, each of us in our own way. Lucio says she is justified, I say she is justified, and so do you. You can pussyfoot as much as you like but that is the essence of your decision. So our judgement is made. Ramon’s vote has determined the result. Does anyone disagree?’

  ‘No. That is the majority decision, though I wish it were otherwise.’ Milos shook his head sadly. ‘In passing on our judgement, Lucio, I think you should also communicate a recommendation for clemency.’

  ‘Bullshit!’

  ‘No, it’s not bullshit, Neil. Ramon recommends clemency and so do I and so does Gancio. You can have your verdict but we have a majority decision in favour of clemency.’

  ‘Why bother reaching a decision? We’re no bloody help to Colombina. What are we going to tell her? Yes but no? For Christ’s sake!’

  ‘Well, Lucio, will you do that?’

  ‘No, Milos. Any plea for clemency is outside our terms of reference. Ramon’s decision has ended the discussion. As much as he has equivocated, the truth is he has found that Colombina has just cause to take her revenge. That is right, isn’t it, Ramon?’

  ‘Yes, Lucio! That is right! What do you want me to say? I will never forgive you for this! You have orchestrated things so that the blood is on my hands. You have, haven’t you? Don’t insult me by denying it!’

  ‘No, Ramon, I won’t insult you. It’s true. I knew how the others would vote as did you. Your only doubt was me. Once I cast my vote you knew you would have to decide the fate of Friedrich Eigenwill. So how does it feel?’

  ‘For Christ’s sake, Lucio!’ Milos knocked his chair flying as he rose to restrain Ramon. ‘How dare you say such a thing! There are five of us. The decision was not Ramon’s alone.’

  ‘Oh, yes it was. That was exactly how Ramon likes it. To be in the position of power, to be the one who decides. He plays with our friendship and our affection. It’s all a game to him, a game with him in control. So how does it feel to be in control of this game, Ramon?’

  Ramon slumped back in his chair, retreating behind the protection of his dark glasses. Milos picked his chair up off the floor and sat back down.

  ‘That’s what all this is about, isn’t it, Lucio? You’re getting your revenge on Ramon for what he did to us in his last story.’

  ‘Not entirely. The main story is true, Gancio can vouch for that. But revenge is not Colombina’s sole prerogative. I embellished the story a touch to get revenge of my own.’

  ‘And you have, no? What you have done to Ramon is no more forgivable than what he does to us.’ Milos paused, his agile mind leaping ahead. ‘Are you suggesting now that our judgement of Friedrich Eigenwill was simply an embellishment?’

  ‘Let me just say it was surplus to requirements. The issue has already been resolved. It reached its conclusion early this week.’ Lucio’s voice betrayed no emotion. He looked around the table at the stunned faces. Nobody was game to ask the question. Finally Ramon found the courage to break the silence.

  ‘And how was the issue resolved? Given the way you voted I assume you have made us all party to murder?’

  ‘No, Ramon. You have been party to nothing more than an interrupted romance stretching back nearly fifty years.’

  ‘What? For Christ’s sake, Lucio, explain yourself!’

  Ramon couldn’t see Lucio’s smile but heard it in his voice. ‘They have done what they were prevented from doing all those years ago. They are giving each other the peace and forgiveness they seek. They have laid old memories to rest. They were married on Tuesday.’

  ‘You bastard!’

  ‘Yes, Neil, I am a bastard. I have beaten you all at your own game and humbled Ramon. That is no small achievement for a man you thought could only tell jokes.’ He began to laugh. ‘Colombina will of course be interested in your opinion, but don’t be surprised if we drop a little in her estimation.’

  ‘You are a bastard, Lucio.’

  ‘Thank you, Gancio.’

  ‘Stop being so smug. You have used this story, a tragic story and also the story of my aunt, for what? To score points. I don’t give a shit if Ramon never forgives you, I will never forgive you!’

  ‘Ahhh … Gancio, what you say is true and I do apologise. But when I began my story I didn’t know that you had personal involvement in it. I will apologise more sincerely to you later. But not in my moment of glory. Tell me Ramon, it was a good story, no?’

  ‘Yes, it was a good story.’ Ramon answered for all of them. ‘It was a bloody good story and bloody well told. Allow me to congratulate you. You were brilliant.’

  ‘My God, you’re all bastards!’

  ‘Yes, Gancio,’ said Ramon evenly. ‘We are all bastards. The story is the thing, the only really important thing. That and your food.’

  Milos and Lucio began to laugh. The others joined in.

  Excerpt from Lunch with the Generals

  DEREK HANSEN

  The first of Derek Hansen’s acclaimed ‘Lunch’ series, reissued to celebrate the publication of the third ‘Lunch’ novel, Lunch with the Stationmaster.

  Ramon, self-styled master storyteller, has steered his listeners down a sinister path littered with love and betrayal, secret police and death squads. But as the Argentinian’s tale nears its startling conclusion, his audience is struck with horror at the possibility that Ramon’s clever invention is nothing more than the cunningly disguised chronicle of his own shadowy past.

  Is Ramon the gifted artist of the imagination or the perpetrator of a terrible act of revenge that defies all forgiveness?

  ‘Hansen is a great novelist. Only the bravest and most confident writer could grant his characters such intelligence and insight and still remain in command.’ The West Australian

  ISBN 0 7322 7542 3

  Excerpt from Lunch with the Stationmaster

  DEREK HANSEN

  The eagerly awaited third novel in Derek Hansen’s bestselling ‘Lunch’ series.

  Lunch with the Stationmaster takes us back to Gancio’s restaurant. It is a Thursday and, as usual, Ramon, Lucio, Milos and Neil have gathered for their weekly lunch appointment. It is Neil’s turn to take the floor—except that Milos steps in and demands to tell his story. He has no choice in the matter, he says: ‘This story has already been too long awaiting the telling. It must be told now. Time is running out. It is not just an obligation but a repayment of a debt.’ With those words he hooks the three other men—and Derek Hansen hooks his readers.

  We are taken back to Hungary in the 1940s, a time when Jews are persecuted and rumours of the terrifying death camps are circulating. This is a novel with huge range, set within a real historical landscape populated by figures like Adolf Eichmann and the Russian and Hungarian secret police. It is also a love story set during a time of turmoil and separation, a story which begins in Hungary and seeks its conclusion in Australia.

  ISBN 0 7322 7508 3

  About the Author

  DEREK HANSEN is a former advertising man
who walked away at the peak of his career to fulfil a lifelong ambition to write novels.

  His first novel, Lunch with the Generals, became an immediate bestseller, followed by Lunch with Mussolini and Sole Survivor. Lunch with the Stationmaster is his sixth novel and the third in the Lunch series.

  Derek Hansen’s work has also been published in America, Europe and the United Kingdom. He is married, has two adult children, and lives on Sydney’s northern beaches.

  Praise

  ‘[Lunch with the Generals] is a rare book and a rare story that blazes life and death and love from every page … the style sparse yet detailed, the sign of a brilliant storyteller.’

  —The Courier-Mail

  ‘Derek Hansen take a bow. You have written one of the most entertaining, gripping and powerful novels of the year.’

  —Sunday Telegraph on Lunch with Mussolini

  ‘Another fine effort from Hansen, with complex characters from wartime Germans to Italian fascists to Australian widows.’

  —The Courier-Mail on Lunch with Mussolini

  ‘Derek Hansen has a knack for making the immediate past come alive with contemporary pain.’

  —Canberra Times on Sole Survivor

  Other Books by Derek Hansen

  Lunch with the Generals

  Sole Survivor

  Blockade

  Perfect Couple

  Lunch with the Stationmaster

  SHORT STORIES

  Dead Fishy

  Psycho Cat

  Copyright

  HarperCollinsPublishers

  First published in Australia in 1994

  By William Heinemann Australia

  This edition published 2014

  by HarperCollinsPublishers Pty Limited

  ABN 36 009 913 517

  A member of the HarperCollinsPublishers (Australia) Pty Limited Group