Biographies: Pageants of Falsehoods!

I've been thinking a lot about biographies recently, mostly because of the big noise associated with this one ...



According to this article from Cartoon Brew (well not so much the article, but from the comments it has generated), Schulz's family is not happy with the book ... which probably wouldn't be a big deal, except that Schulz's son has gone to the trouble of detailing and debunking a number of assertions made by the author about the famous cartoonist.

The family granted David Michaelis access to Schulz's private papers and files from the beginning, and they acknowledged that the author intended to write about the less wholesome aspects of the cartoonist's life and career, including an affair with a younger woman. But apparently what is causing the family so much agita now is that the "facts" Michaelis gained about Schulz's private life have not exactly made it into the book intact. I don't know this for a fact, but come on, who are you going to believe: a man who never met Schulz except through his papers and files, or Schulz's own children who spent their entire lives with the man? And unlike most children of famous people, they all agree with each other that Schulz was a great dad.

Don't get me wrong! Some of my favorite books are biographies, but the best ones are always written -- or ably assisted -- by someone who knew the subject well. A great example would be "Gracie: A Love Story", a biography of Gracie Allen written by George Burns. The book is funny and revealing but also warm and personal because George knew this woman intimately for more than 40 years.

Imagine if a (well-meaning but over-analytical) biographer who had never met Gracie Allen tried to psychoanalyze her through papers and files and second-hand stories from senile acquaintances. It wouldn't have been entertaining or illuminating. Sure you might learn a few interesting rumors, but the book would have very little heart or warmth because a personal connection is missing between the writer and the subject ...

LIKE IN THIS BOOK!:


I have only read excerpts out of this one, but believe me, it was enough. No heart. No warmth. It's more like a psychiatric report than a biography. Look at the Goddamn title, for crying out loud! Get a load of the insightful blurb from the cover, too: "Learn about the sexual dynamics of Stanwyck's marriage to Robert Taylor". Uh ... No thanks.

I'm sure I know Barbara just as well as the biographer above, and have probably met her in person as many times as he did. But even a dope like me knows that she led a fascinating and colorful life filled with trouble, pain, love, hate, fun, enemies, friends, and adventures that would make for a warm, funny, dramatic outstanding biography. Now who's gonna write it right? She had a lot of close friends, that's for sure. At least one of them should still be alive, and handy with a typewriter.

Anyway, this brings me back to where I started. I say that a man of Charles Schulz's magnanimousness deserves a biography that is both sensitive and ACCURATE! And the only people who are capable of doing it that way are the people who knew him best: his family! Not an over-analytical biographer. My advice to the children of the house of Schulz is to get cracking on that ultimate biography of your father! It's worth the wait if it will be done right.