Out of Tune : David Helfgott and the Myth of Shine

Rating:
Summary: A distortion and disservice to her brother
Review: 4 Stars for writing style; 2 stars for the implications and reason for publishing. One cannot comment on this book without making reference to Gillian Helfgott's book as well. Margaret cannot be 100% wrong. David and Gillian Helfgott cannot be 100% wrong. Therefore, I took both Gillian's book and Margaret's book and began comparisons. Several things struck me: what man would pick up his family, force them to travel 2000 miles, and all with no prospects or money? (I mention this since the biggest bone of contention seems to be the father, Peter--his actions at certains times were questionable behavior by any stretch of the imagination.) Next, why are some of David's siblings literally beaming in the photo (in Gillian's book) taken with Actress Redgrave during the filming of SHINE? I could go on and on, but I think the truth lies somewhere in-between the two books. It's unfortunate that this book has and may continue to overshadow David's career and Gillian's sincerity. Read this book with the proverbial grain of salt. Besides, Margaret's childhood was not necessarily David's, unless she was with him 24 hours per day. The only good thing about the book is the obvious love the author has for her deceased father. Of course, Gillian made an effort in her book, too, to show that there were happy times and love. No stars for how Margaret took some of what Gillian had to say out of context. This leaves the book with a very iffy three stars.

Rating:
Summary: Personal accounts are just that
Review: Gillian Helfgott herself has said, "The film was inspired by David's life; it was never meant to be a documentary. Consequently, it has used some dramatic license and some characters have been amalgamated because of time restriction. The essence of the film was very close to David's experiences and the section of the film dealing with our life is almost documentary."

I am certain that most siblings would offer differing accounts of their childhood experiences; and each is certainly entitled to their own story. One need not discredit the other. I am interested by both sides and appreciate Margaret's account as it provides another level of information ... however, having met Gillian and David I would leave with another quote from Gillian's online chat:

"At the end of my book, David expresses his emotional reaction after he recorded the Rach 3 in Copenhagen. His father died in 1975 but he felt his presence with him very much and he frequently says: 'Daddy would be proud of me'"

Rating:
Summary: If you haven't already read it, do so. Recommended!
Review: I have been stimulated by a number of your readers' reviews to once again see the video of "Shine" and re-read the book "Out of Tune".

A number of differences are outstanding. Whereas Margaret Helfgott interviews and quotes from many actual people who knew David in the past, identifying them by name, Scott Hicks "stands by his research" involving "friends, teachers, medical people and colleagues of David's" - however, he does not identify a single one of these people despite being challenged. Similarly, regarding Hick's claim that he was told that Shine's "portrait" of Peter Helfgott was actually "kind" and that there were far greater abuses committed by Peter which he chose not to include in the film. Who were these anonymous people who unstintingly fed Hicks his unconfirmed "facts"? If we did not believe Hicks totally, we might think this was innuendo in the extreme - in the best tradition of throwing mud so that some may stick.

What possible motive could Margaret have for defending her father to such lengths? Could it be Hick's claimed jealousy between the siblings, for which no shred of evidence exists in any of the writings.

Apropos the famed disclaimer at the end of the video "Shine" - it is microscopic! Unlike many biopics which honestly displayed their disclaimers legibly and clearly at the start of the film, Hick's disclaimer was illegible; despite the fact that living family members had NOT given permission for their real names to be used in the film. Once again, if one did not doubt Hicks' integrity one might really think that his advertised claims of "Shine" representing the true life story of David Helfgott, were honest.

Apart from attempting to correct the numerous distortions presented in "Shine", Margaret Helfgott, described on the book jacket as a music teacher, represents in "Out of Tune", a sole individual nobly fighting the forces of the film industry, its exploitation and its millions.

Anyone interested in truth and justice should read "Out of Tune".

Rating:
Summary: If you haven't already read it, do so. Recommended!
Review: I have been stimulated by a number of your readers' reviews to once again see the video of "Shine" and re-read the book "Out of Tune".

A number of differences are outstanding. Whereas Margaret Helfgott interviews and quotes from many actual people who knew David in the past, identifying them by name, Scott Hicks "stands by his research" involving "friends, teachers, medical people and colleagues of David's" - however, he does not identify a single one of these people despite being challenged. Similarly, regarding Hick's claim that he was told that Shine's "portrait" of Peter Helfgott was actually "kind" and that there were far greater abuses committed by Peter which he chose not to include in the film. Who were these anonymous people who unstintingly fed Hicks his unconfirmed "facts"? If we did not believe Hicks totally, we might think this was innuendo in the extreme - in the best tradition of throwing mud so that some may stick.

What possible motive could Margaret have for defending her father to such lengths? Could it be Hick's claimed jealousy between the siblings, for which no shred of evidence exists in any of the writings.

Apropos the famed disclaimer at the end of the video "Shine" - it is microscopic! Unlike many biopics which honestly displayed their disclaimers legibly and clearly at the start of the film, Hick's disclaimer was illegible; despite the fact that living family members had NOT given permission for their real names to be used in the film. Once again, if one did not doubt Hicks' integrity one might really think that his advertised claims of "Shine" representing the true life story of David Helfgott, were honest.

Apart from attempting to correct the numerous distortions presented in "Shine", Margaret Helfgott, described on the book jacket as a music teacher, represents in "Out of Tune", a sole individual nobly fighting the forces of the film industry, its exploitation and its millions.

Anyone interested in truth and justice should read "Out of Tune".

Rating:
Summary: Margaret VS. David
Review: I read this book after watching "Shine" and became enthralled with the life of David Helfgott. I have to say that although Margaret feels the need to have to defend her father, she blatantly disregards her brother's feelings. The way one person perceives a behavior, may be perceived a different way by someone else. There are no right or wrong answers when dealing with emotions. It's not a matter of "he said/she said." Margaret may have perceived a father's love for his child when Peter worked with David. However, David may have perceived Peter as abusive, controlling, and dominating.

Rating:
Summary: A painful and loving fight against the myth of "Shine"
Review: I recall after seeing "Shine", I remarked to a friend that while I enjoyed the film, "It sadly doesn't happen that way in real life".

As a health professional who has worked for many years with people, including artists who suffered from schizophrenic disorders, I can affirm that Margaret Helfgott's book rings only, too true.

As a painful and loving testament to her father Peter, her family and her brother David, Margaret Helfgott takes the reader through the maze of distortion and lies by "Shine's" director Scott Hicks, David's second wife Gillian, and the commercial exploitation of David Helfgott by post production interests. Despite the distorted need to invent blame, the profound reality of David Helfgott's illness will not be altered by the many lies in "Shine" about his late father Peter and his family.

I could not put Margaret Helfgott's book down, and highly recommend it to anyone who saw the fiction of "Shine", read the screenplay, or are just interested in understanding the impact of schizophrenic-type disorders on patients and families.

Rating:
Summary: A sister's view
Review: I've finally read the book after waiting a period of time after reading Scott Hick's published letter to the Wall Street Journal when this book first came out. And I'll include that here in fairness and as background to my reaction to the book.

The book's view is almost diametrically opposed to the one in the film and I sense the truth is somewhat in the middle. There is also a disclaimer at the end of the movie to the effect that it was a "fictionalized" story based on the life of David Helfgott.

Margaret's view of her father is that he was an angel. Reading between the lines, this can't be so, in which case we may be dealing with undue loyalty and the perspective of a sister who seems, in her narrative, jealous of the attention her father gave young David. It's an unpleasant read. Here are excerpts from Scott Hick's response to the reviewer for the WSJournal Aug. 27, 1998.

--- '... my primary source was not David Helfgott's wife Gillian, but David

Helfgott himself.

'In "Shine" I made a film that speaks for itself, and I stand by the research that was conducted in preparation for it, drawn from numerous interviews with friends, relatives, teachers, medical people and colleagues of David's. A number of these people were adult observers of Peter Helfgott and his family when Margaret and David were very young children.

'I maintain that all of the actions of the character Peter Helfgott have their origins in real events. In fact, some people who knew David Helfgott's father have commented to me that it is, if anything, a rather kind portrait. Certainly, I was told of abuses far more serious than those shown in the film, which I chose not to include in order to spare the family as well as the audience. When David's sister Susie read the script, she thanked me sincerely for my discretion about these events, which I have never discussed publicly. Susie continues to dispute Margaret's view of events, and has said publicly that her sister views the past through "rose-coloured glasses."

'Margaret Helfgott's first words to me were, "My father was a saint," a view she continues to campaign for, but which is not shared by other members of her family. I believe she chooses, for reasons of her own, to block out the memories of the years she has described in her own letters to family members as "traumatized."

'David's brother, Les Helfgott, has repeatedly told me and others that his father hit him, on one occasion actually knocking him unconscious. Les was omitted from the screenplay at his own request. When I gave him the script to read, he asked to be included in it again, but added that he gave the film his blessing, regardless. I gave Les, David's sister Louise and his mother Rae the opportunity to preview the film privately and discuss it with me. Afterward, Les Helfgott wrote to thank me, saying, "Any fears we may have had regarding the film have now gone. You have done a brilliant job of 'Shine'." Several weeks later, Les and Louise were my guests at the world premiere of the film, joining in the celebrations publicly with me. This was a strange way to show the concern and anger that Margaret's book would now have us believe they feel.

'Louise was also our guest during filming, and actually appears briefly in the film. Louise is the author of a play about Peter Helfgott (which she told me was workshopped at the Australian National Playwrights' Conference in Canberra) that is more explicit in its depiction of her father than is "Shine."

'Margaret Helfgott is, of course, entitled to her memory, despite consistently denying her brother David's right to his. It is tragic that she is unable to share her brother's joy at recapturing fragments of his lost career while overcoming the difficulties of his past. Perhaps this is a reflection of a decades-old jealousy instilled by the intense spirit of competitiveness her father fostered between Margaret and David, as she herself describes in her book . . .

'. . . she remains devoted to the memory of a complicated man who, whatever his merits, left behind him a family legacy that one psychiatrist who knew the Helfgotts described to me as "a bottomless pit of need."

Scott Hicks Director of "Shine" Adelaide, South Australia '

---

Hopefully, a balance to a much-distributed book.

Rating:
Summary: An important book
Review: This is a book which deserves wide circulation to counter the grossly misleading account of events in the film which purports to be based on David Helfgott's life. Margaret Helfgott's account is backed up by quotations from numerous people who knew Peter, David and the family at all periods of their lives, and who have provided testimony that the portrayal of Peter Helfgott in the film (and specifically his behaviour towards David) is a travesty of the facts. More specifically, the filmmakers were oblivious to the disrepute into which the notion that schizo-affective disorders are caused by bad parenting has fallen in modern psychiatric practice. But, as the Reverend Robert Fairman writes about the film's misrepresentations of the years David spent at his hostel after a long period hospitalization, 'The filmmakers' line of thinking must have been: Why let facts get in the way of a good story?'