The Rosie Effect (40 page)
Nobody else knew we were coming, so we had eight days together without interruption. It was incredible! The enjoyment of interacting with Rosie was amplified by the realisation that I had almost lost her.
Phil’s house in suburban Melbourne had broadband-internet facilities, and that was all I needed to communicate with Inge and the B Team and continue writing up the two projects.
Phil returned on 10 January. All relatives wanted us to stay in Melbourne for the birth, and David Borenstein supported the decision. Rosie had already cancelled her US arrangements
and booked at a Melbourne hospital after deciding to leave me, so it was less disruptive to plans overall.
We spent three days at my family home in Shepparton. The stress of interaction was alleviated by the debriefing of the Soundproof Crib Project with my father. We talked for
hours
beyond bedtime without the support of alcohol. My father had solved some practical problems with the use of the materials, and the Korean research team was negotiating the rights to the improvements and my father’s ongoing participation. It was unlikely my father would become rich but, in a scenario reminiscent of the passing of the batons, he would need to hand the hardware store responsibilities to my brother Trevor. My brother was extremely pleased with this development. I wondered if one day I would hand over something of my life to Bud.
To my surprise, and in contradiction to predictions from Gene, my mother and Rosie got on well and seemed to have a great deal in common.
Our baby emerged without problems (other than the expected discomfort of birth, which my reading had prepared me for) at 2.04 a.m. on 14 February, the second anniversary of our first date, the Jacket Incident and the Balcony Dinner.
Everyone
noted that it was Valentine’s Day, which explained why I had encountered difficulty in reserving a table at a prestigious restaurant two years earlier.
The birth process would have been fascinating to watch, but I followed Gene’s advice to ‘stay at the head end’ and provide emotional support rather than observe as a scientist. Rosie was extremely happy with the outcome, and I was
surprised to find that I had an immediate emotional reaction myself, though not as strong as when Rosie had decided to rejoin our relationship.
The baby’s gender is male, and accordingly we have given it a conventional male name. There was some debate.
‘We can’t call him “Bud”. It’s a nickname. An American nickname.’
‘American culture is pervasive. Bud Tingwell was Australian.’
‘Who’s Bud Tingwell?’ said Rosie.
‘Famous Australian actor. He was in
Malcolm
and
The Last Bottle.
’
‘Name one scientist called Bud.’
‘Our son may not be a scientist. Abbott from Abbott and Costello was Bud. Bud Powell was one of jazz’s most important pianists. Bud Harrelson was an All-Star shortstop.’
‘With the Yankees?’
‘The Mets.’
‘You want to name him after a Mets player?’
‘Bud Cort was Harold in
Harold and Maude
. Bud Freeman. Another influential jazz player. A saxophonist. Plus numerous Buddys.’
‘You’ve looked it up, haven’t you? You don’t know anything about jazz.’
‘Of course. So I would have a convincing argument for retaining the name. It seems odd to change someone’s name because of a single event in their lives. You didn’t change your name when we got married.’
‘We’re talking about his birth. Anyway, it stands for Baby Under Development. First: he’s not under development any more, he’s an actual baby, and second: he won’t always be a baby.’
‘Unfortunately Hud isn’t a name.’
‘Hud?’ said Rosie.
‘Human Under Development.’
‘It’s the name of a prophet. An Islamic prophet. You’re not the only one who knows stuff.’
‘Unacceptable. Blatant connection to a religion is inappropriate.’
‘Short for Hudson, maybe.’
I considered Rosie’s suggestion for a few moments.
‘Perfect solution. Concatenation of
Human Under Development
and
Son
. Connection to New York, the place of conception, via the river and the associated explorer. Australian usage with connection to the Terrorist Incident which saved our relationship.’
‘What?’
‘Hudson Fysh was the founder of Qantas. Common knowledge from the airline magazine.’
‘And Peter Hudson, the footballer, was Phil’s hero. One little problem. Remember what it stands for.
Under Development.
He’s a full human now. Actually, it makes him sound like the
son
of a human under development.’
‘Correct. Humans should be permanently under development.’
Rosie laughed. ‘Hudson’s father, in particular.’
‘Since you nominated only one problem, and it has been
dismissed, I assume that he is now named Hudson.’
‘Hard to argue with your logic. As always.’
Another joint task successfully completed. I gave Hudson back to Rosie to feed. I needed to schedule Phil to babysit so that Rosie and I could commence tango lessons.
The Rosie Project
concluded with a long and probably incomplete list of acknowledgements, reflecting its five-year journey from concept to publication. I was learning to write at the same time, and many people helped me with general advice and encouragement as well as specific suggestions about the manuscript.
Thanks in good measure to the help I received from them, I approached
The Rosie Effect
with a clearer idea of what I was doing, and wrote the first draft with significant input from only two people. My wife, Anne Buist, to whom the book is dedicated, brought a writer’s understanding of story as well as her expertise as a professor of psychiatry to the table (usually it was a table with a bottle of wine open). She takes no responsibility for Gene’s views on attachment theory. My
friend Rod, who, with his wife Lynette, was the inspiration for and dedicatee of
The Rosie Project
, was my other sounding board. Our conversations as we jogged beside Melbourne’s Yarra River inspired the soundproof crib, the Bluefin Tuna Incident and the Antenatal Uproar.
I was unusually fortunate in the editing process: in addition to Michael Heyward and Rebecca Starford at Text Publishing, several of my international publishers provided me with detailed notes: Cordelia Borchardt at S. Fischer Verlag; Maxine Hitchcock at Michael Joseph; Jennifer Lambert at HarperCollins Canada; Marysue Rucci at Simon & Schuster; and Giuseppe Strazzeri at Longanesi.
My first readers also provided valuable feedback: Jean and Greg Buist, Tania Chandler, Eamonn Cooke, Corine Jansonius, Peter McMillan, Rod Miller, Helen O’Connell, Dominique and Daniel Simsion, Sue Waddell, Geri Walsh and Heidi Winnen. Thanks also to Shari Lusskin, April Reeve and Meg Spinelli for their local knowledge of New York and American medical education, David Lange for his advice on refrigeration and Chris Waddell for his drumming stories. W. H. Chong designed the Australian cover.
The references to research in psychology and pregnancy incorporate the prejudices of fictional characters and should be taken with a grain of salt. In particular, Don’s interpretation of
What to Expect When You’re Expecting
, Rosie’s use of various papers to support her dietary choices and the implicit reference to Feldman et al.’s work as a basis for the Lesbian Mothers Project do not necessarily represent their authors’ intentions.
Many publishers, booksellers and readers around the world have contributed to making
The Rosie Project
a success and
are already doing the same for
The Rosie Effect
. In Australia, thanks are particularly due to Anne Beilby, Jane Novak, Kirsty Wilson and their teams at Text Publishing who have supported my writing and been creative in bringing it to a wide audience.