Humphrey Carpenter (1946–2005)

"A biografia autorizada do criador da Terra-média. Nas décadas posteriores ao falecimento de J.R.R. Tolkien, em setembro de 1973, milhões de pessoas leram O Hobbit, O Senhor dos Anéis e O Silmarillion e ficaram tão fascinadas quanto intrigadas com o homem muito reservado por trás dos livros. Nascido na África do Sul, em janeiro de 1892, John Ronald Reuel Tolkien ficou órfão durante a infância e cresceu quase na pobreza. Ele serviu na Primeira Guerra Mundial e sobreviveu à Batalha do Somme, onde perdeu quase todos os seus amigos mais íntimos. Após a guerra, retornou à vida acadêmica, conquistando uma grande reputação como estudioso e professor universitário, e tornando-se, por fim, Professor de Inglês em Oxford, onde fez amizade com C.S. Lewis e os outros escritores conhecidos, formando um grupo denominado Os Inklings. Então, de repente, sua vida mudou dramaticamente. Certo dia, enquanto corrigia provas, ele acabou escrevendo no verso de uma folha: "Numa toca no chão vivia um hobbit" – e a fama mundial o aguardava. Humphrey Carpenter recebeu acesso irrestrito a todos os documentos de Tolkien e entrevistou seus amigos e familiares. A partir dessas fontes ele segue o longo e doloroso processo de criação que produziu O Senhor dos Anéis e O Silmarillion e fornece uma vasta gama de informações sobre a vida e a obra de um dos mais estimados autores do século XX."… (altro)

The Angry Young Men: polo neck sweaters, duffel coats, trad jazz, ban the bomb, and it’s grim up North. Something along those lines, anyway. Carpenter’s book is informative and sometimes perceptive, though his plodding biographical approach tends to obscure the bigger picture. He also gets himself unnecessarily worked up over whether the AYM was a movement or not - it was just a shorthand term, wasn’t it?- and concludes the whole thing was essentially a media invention. Up to a point, Lord Copper. It’s true that none of the AYM regarded themselves as part of a group and, with the exception of John Osborne, they don’t seem to have been particularly angry (even Osborne was more dyspeptically ranting than angry in any politically coherent sense). They were, nonetheless, emblematic of a sea change in British cultural life that started in the mid-fifties and continued through the sixties; one that saw the emergence of new writers, sometimes from working-class backgrounds, and that brought about a revitalisation of British theatre in particular. Why this change happened and what it might tell us about the wider society are interesting questions; unfortunately, Carpenter doesn’t bother to ask them. At best he seems to regard the AYM as a prelude to the satire boom of the sixties. He clearly thinks that the early sixties satirical TV show TW3 was more important, apparently agreeing with the Conservative Prime Minister Edward Heath that it brought about ‘the death of deference’ (you could have fooled me). Bit odd that, I thought: Amis, Osborne and co. as a warm-up act for the wit and wisdom of David Frost.

The book is subtitled ‘A Literary Comedy of the 1950s’. Most of the comedy, although it’s entirely of the unintended variety, is provided by the extraordinary Colin Wilson. Wilson - who evidently regarded himself as a combination of Dostoevsky, Nietzsche and Sartre, but without any of their faults - had an unfortunate habit of loudly declaring his own genius: ‘The day must come when I’m hailed as a major prophet. I am the major literary genius of our century… the most serious man of our age’. There was lots more in that self-deprecating vein plus the odd bouquet tossed in the direction of the egregious Sir Oswald Mosley, leader of the British Union of Fascists, whom Wilson thought ‘rather a decent chap’. He went from being heralded as a major writer to being ridiculed as a publicity-seeking buffoon within the space of twelve months.

The AYM might not have been a movement, but they certainly constituted a cultural moment, and one that was, I think, more significant than Carpenter acknowledges. Still, this is an enjoyable book, and it was nice to be reminded of a time when Kingsley Amis could be described as ‘a literary Teddy boy’ without anyone collapsing in hysterical laughter.… (altro)

Some of the books about writers and artists in Paris in the 20s and 30s are written by those who were there and who give their first hand accounts. Others are researched and written by those who weren't there. The first person accounts have their obvious strengths, while the researched accounts have theirs, mainly a more likely (but not assured) lack of personal bias or ax to grind, and a broader perspective and access to the writings, memoirs, and letters of all those who were there.

Whereas Noel Riley Fitch's book about Sylvia Beach was probably thoroughly researched, the result was a badly written, encyclopedic volume that had some fine tidbits but was overall boring. Carpenter's book is a pleasure to read. This is not a encyclopedia. It is stories and anecdotes and quotes and pieces of information that tie it all together so that you get a coherent picture of the people and what they were doing and who they were doing it to. Or with.

A fair amount of space is devoted to Hemingway and the writing of The Sun Also Rises. I started to become impatient with how much time and detail Carpenter was spending on that one book. For the most part, he doesn't spend time talking about individual books. Why this one? Because the story behind it and how it came to be written and the effect of it after it was published are a critical element to that time and place in Paris.

Carpenter's book is more about the people than the literature they created. It is a social history composed of small individual portraits. At its core, it's about people and friendship. As Carpenter writes at the end, "The geniuses had mostly turned out not to be geniuses after all. Yet they had been geniuses at being together, drinking together, sleeping together, and quarreling together..."

Maybe that is why he stole McAlmon's title? If so, I almost forgive him.… (altro)

Humphrey Carpenter's authorized biography of Tolkien is a surprisingly balanced picture of the man. Carpenter clearly admires Tolkien's talent without being blind to his faults. Carpenter simply adores the man for who he was, faults and all, and does not try to paint some mythic portrait of Tolkien. Although Tolkien possessed an extraordinary mind, he was quite - in many aspects - an ordinary man, duty bound to professional obligations and family life. Tolkien preferred the 'quiet life' you see and was in many ways, a Hobbit from the Baggin's side of the tracks in temperament and lifestyle. Yet his mind (I suspect) possessed the longings of a Took...

J.R.R. Tolkien: A Biography is immensely readable, and paints a wonderful portrait of a man who in my opinion, is the most important literary figure of the 20th century.… (altro)