Peeking under the mask...
I’m a biography junkie. No matter how many books I have on the go at any given moment (usually three or four) you can almost guarantee that one of them will be a biography.
It’s not unknown for me to come across some historical figure and do some checking to see if anyone’s written a recent biography, or even one at all. I might even add the name to my “This person deserves a biography - I should write it one day” list. (A list that currently has six names on it.)
One of the things I like about the art of writing, and reading, biography (apart from just being interested in the person’s life, actions and impact on history), is that it often tells you as much about the author as it does about the subject.
As I found out when researching and writing Before They Were Beatles, it doesn’t matter how dispassionate you try to be up front, you will bring pre-conceived ideas about the subject to your work. In the course of research you might change your mind, but more often the biographer will interpret “facts” to fit their own agenda. To really understand the subject it is best to read at least a couple of biographies that have different viewpoints.
Or another approach maybe to read the person’s autobiography, if one exists. A biographer is pretty much free (with the boundaries of the laws of libel) to say anything, and present the subject in whatever light they choose. While in a autobiography it’s the subject themselves presenting the way they want to be perceived and remembered.
Of course in that case the subject will most likely want to emphasize the positive over the negative. Something I can attest to having worked on one “autobiography” project where the subject regularly demonstrated a somewhat selective memory.
So autobiographies have a natural tendency to be “sugar coated” and often you have to read between the facts to get any real sense of the individual. For this reason I tend to shy away from reading self-penned (or more commonly ghost written) memoirs.
Over the last few weeks I ignored my own unspoken advice and picked up a couple of autobiographies - and now wish I hadn’t. Not for the “sugar coating” reason mentioned above, but the exact opposite.
The two books in question detailed the lives of two people I considered personal heroes.
- One a musician whose work has helped me through a few rough patches and whose skill and musicianship I greatly admire.
- One a racing driver of supreme natural talent who showed remarkable courage to come back after receiving crippling injuries in one of the most horrific accidents the sport has ever witnessed.
Neither book was “sugar coated,” in fact they were honest, almost brutally honest. So what was the problem?
One of my heroes came over as, for want of a better phrase, a complete douche-bag. The other as an arrogant man who never took responsibility for any failings; all the high points were because of him, and all the low points in his life down to someone else.
I can still appreciate what both men have achieved for the results they produced. But the manner in which they did it, and the ideals I had about both is forever tarnished.
I guess I learned to be wary about peeking under the mask of your heroes -you may not like what you find looking back at you.
It’s not unknown for me to come across some historical figure and do some checking to see if anyone’s written a recent biography, or even one at all. I might even add the name to my “This person deserves a biography - I should write it one day” list. (A list that currently has six names on it.)
One of the things I like about the art of writing, and reading, biography (apart from just being interested in the person’s life, actions and impact on history), is that it often tells you as much about the author as it does about the subject.
As I found out when researching and writing Before They Were Beatles, it doesn’t matter how dispassionate you try to be up front, you will bring pre-conceived ideas about the subject to your work. In the course of research you might change your mind, but more often the biographer will interpret “facts” to fit their own agenda. To really understand the subject it is best to read at least a couple of biographies that have different viewpoints.
Or another approach maybe to read the person’s autobiography, if one exists. A biographer is pretty much free (with the boundaries of the laws of libel) to say anything, and present the subject in whatever light they choose. While in a autobiography it’s the subject themselves presenting the way they want to be perceived and remembered.
Of course in that case the subject will most likely want to emphasize the positive over the negative. Something I can attest to having worked on one “autobiography” project where the subject regularly demonstrated a somewhat selective memory.
So autobiographies have a natural tendency to be “sugar coated” and often you have to read between the facts to get any real sense of the individual. For this reason I tend to shy away from reading self-penned (or more commonly ghost written) memoirs.
Over the last few weeks I ignored my own unspoken advice and picked up a couple of autobiographies - and now wish I hadn’t. Not for the “sugar coating” reason mentioned above, but the exact opposite.
The two books in question detailed the lives of two people I considered personal heroes.
- One a musician whose work has helped me through a few rough patches and whose skill and musicianship I greatly admire.
- One a racing driver of supreme natural talent who showed remarkable courage to come back after receiving crippling injuries in one of the most horrific accidents the sport has ever witnessed.
Neither book was “sugar coated,” in fact they were honest, almost brutally honest. So what was the problem?
One of my heroes came over as, for want of a better phrase, a complete douche-bag. The other as an arrogant man who never took responsibility for any failings; all the high points were because of him, and all the low points in his life down to someone else.
I can still appreciate what both men have achieved for the results they produced. But the manner in which they did it, and the ideals I had about both is forever tarnished.
I guess I learned to be wary about peeking under the mask of your heroes -you may not like what you find looking back at you.