As part of the 30th anniversary of Eureka Street, I’ve been speaking with the team who first started the publication in 1991, alongside various people who have played a part in the Eureka Street story.
In these (digital) pages, Morag Fraser AM needs no introduction. An editor, writer and legend in Australian literary commentary, Morag was editor of Eureka Street for its first thirteen years of existence. In the intervening years, Morag has been an adjunct professor in Humanities and Social Sciences at La Trobe University, Chair of Australian Book Review, and a judge for some of Australia’s most prestigious literary prizes including the Miles Franklin Literary Award. In 2004, she was made a Member of the Order of Australia for services to journalism.
Morag Fraser is an entertaining and erudite conversationalist and according to founding publisher Michael Kelly SJ, it was Morag who gave Eureka Street its distinctive voice. In this interview, it’s that unique voice our discussion keeps returning to.
The tone for Eureka Street was — and is — witty and irreverent in a way that acknowledges human dignity, and avoids descending into satire. ‘It is a fine line,’ Morag admits. ‘You take your material seriously, you don't take yourself seriously at all, all the while treating people with dignity and respect.’
The Eureka Street voice is, much like the founding team, complicated. And a proper understanding of the voice requires an understanding of the magazine’s formation.
‘Eureka Street was established by a very particular group of men at a particular moment in church history,’ Morag says, referring to Peter Steele SJ, Jesuit provincial and professor of English at the University of Melbourne; Michael Kelly SJ, the entrepreneurial spirit behind the magazine; and Bill Uren SJ, a professional ethicist who happened to be the next provincial after Peter Steele. Add to that list Adrian Lyons SJ, Andrew Hamilton SJ, Michael McGirr, Frank Brennan SJ and you have an intellectual powerhouse of gifted individuals. ‘These men believed that the Church, particularly the Jesuit tradition, had something to bring to public debate.’
But what they created could not be easily categorised as simply a ‘Catholic’ magazine, and was never a publication that shied away from publishing challenging ideas. ‘All those men were broad thinkers and I don’t think they wanted a Catholic silo magazine. We wanted a magazine that explored issues deeply.’
‘Intellectual integrity, wit, seriousness and an understanding of your audience and a love of people. It’s just a