I don't disagree. But 'temporary fix' implies he hoped it would stay secret forever, which may not be true; maybe he himself hoped the truth would come out, but didn't think it was right for him to be the one to do it.
I still love biography (how could I live without Walton and Johnson and Boswell...) but I am wary of biographies of the living. That's one reason so many of the subjects of Second Act are long dead. Archives have many answers that journalism does not.
This is some of your best work, Henry -- short, sharp, incisive, comprehensive.
The fear of being or seeming prurient is one of the great evils and weaknesses of the mainstream literary world. The deep human desire to hide what we do not like is one of our very worst qualities.
Related to this topic...curious if you've read Claire Dederer's Monsters. (I'm halfway through and reserving opinion.) I don't love the overly personal, naval-gaze, American-style insert-yourself-into-everything style of essay writing, I do think reckoning with the idea of how to enjoy the 'art' of flawed creators is worthy of exploring.
I think we can and should be interested in artists' lives without letting it colour our appreciation of their work, though in many cases (i.e. Jane Eyre) it gives us a basis for understanding the work also. Haven't read the book... will have a look in the library next time I'm there, thanks!
I'm a free speech person and I think in cases like this it's clearly better to tell the truth. Once there had been a conviction it seems bizarre for this to have been kept quiet... The feelings being saved here were not those of the victim, which seems significant to me.
I don't disagree. But 'temporary fix' implies he hoped it would stay secret forever, which may not be true; maybe he himself hoped the truth would come out, but didn't think it was right for him to be the one to do it.
yes that's true, all I meant by temporary was that sooner or later his concealment would be pointless. It never does stay secret forever.
Why I don't read literary biographies! Great piece.
I still love biography (how could I live without Walton and Johnson and Boswell...) but I am wary of biographies of the living. That's one reason so many of the subjects of Second Act are long dead. Archives have many answers that journalism does not.
This is some of your best work, Henry -- short, sharp, incisive, comprehensive.
The fear of being or seeming prurient is one of the great evils and weaknesses of the mainstream literary world. The deep human desire to hide what we do not like is one of our very worst qualities.
Oh thank you! I guess my long-standing interest in biography makes me weirdly niche for stuff like this
Devastating news about Munro. I don't even know how to compute the news, let alone the role of a biographer.
Yes the whole thing is startling...
Related to this topic...curious if you've read Claire Dederer's Monsters. (I'm halfway through and reserving opinion.) I don't love the overly personal, naval-gaze, American-style insert-yourself-into-everything style of essay writing, I do think reckoning with the idea of how to enjoy the 'art' of flawed creators is worthy of exploring.
https://www.penguinrandomhouse.com/books/589194/monsters-by-claire-dederer/
I think we can and should be interested in artists' lives without letting it colour our appreciation of their work, though in many cases (i.e. Jane Eyre) it gives us a basis for understanding the work also. Haven't read the book... will have a look in the library next time I'm there, thanks!
I'm a free speech person and I think in cases like this it's clearly better to tell the truth. Once there had been a conviction it seems bizarre for this to have been kept quiet... The feelings being saved here were not those of the victim, which seems significant to me.