Re: The Remarkable Life of Leonard Cohen: new biography (2010)
Posted: Sun Nov 14, 2010 5:16 pm
I guess this'll be my last word on the subject here or I'm in danger of repeating myself. I also have to move on and am already involved in new projects and its draining to give energy and time to old work. And my girlfiend forbids it, but I'm sneaking this in while she's in the bath...
But to address some recurring criticisims -
I wonder how many reading this have very idealistic notions of how and why a book is written. I went into the details of my own experience with this book and writing in particular within the Heck of a Guy interview for those interested.
Time is a huge part of the process. Lack of time. There are strict deadlines a paid author has to stick to or you are in danger of not getting paid or breaking contract. I had just over a year to write about LC's life and I had to take it or leave it. (I originally asked for a minimum of two years. I also said in the HOAG interview that writing about Cohen was like writing about God except that LC isn't dead. It is a VAST life, as wide and deep as its long).
That said, it shouldn't be any concern of the reader as to what the circumstances of writing a book are but these are the facts. Given a choice I would have had as long as I wanted to write a book on the subject. This isn't the reality of the matter. This means I had to focus on a particular strain of Cohen's rich, varied life. My main interest in this case is the records. Cohen's albums. This is what turns me on most about Cohen's work. And in all my biographies, I want to write primarily about the work. I am not interested in the ambiguties of the subject's personal or sex life unless they directly affect and are involved with the work (Drugs and drink are usually staple culprits in thsi regard), in the main. I'm not even overly interested in their childhood curcumstances. ('All that Charles Dickens stuff' to paraphrase Fitzgerald).
What I am interested in his the process and the mechanisims of the music and hows it is made and how its released and how its recieved. I've a lot of experience in this field myself and this gives me a perspective that perhaps other writers don't have. (Nadel's book was a Tower of knowledge but I got the sense that for all of the many strengths in that book the author was not particularly musical). No Cohen book I'd ever read -as a fan -properly addressed his recording career and this is what I set out to do, within of course the greater context of his life. And in this I think I came back with much new and valuable insight and information. For instance, I've never read anywhere else accounts of the making of LC's first album in such detail. The same goes for the Lissauer albums, for the Spector album and in particular (my LC favourite), '10 new songs'. None of the people I interviewed for these albums - the musicians, the producers themselves - including at length Sahron Robinson and Lissauer amongst many others - had ever talked in depth about their experiences of making these records before. At least not publically. And yet anyone reading the negative comments on this board and elsewhwere would not be aware of this. I've noticed that most negative reviews of this book tend to be almost purely negative ; there is little balance given.
I never intended to cover Cohen's literary output so the fact that I didn't is hard for me to take as a criticisim. Nadel's book gives a truly comprehensive and meaningful analysis of this strain of Cohen's work and I think that would be hard to best in a general biography. Add to which, I don't rate Cohen as a novelist while at the same time I find him an unusually powerful and untypical vocalist and songwriter - as a singer and musician he is a fascinating subject to me, as a novelist a curio at best.
Regarding Cohen's early life...it would have been intruiging and exciting to discover at this stage that he had been one of twins ala Elvis or had been born with a tail and spent the first 3 years of his life underwater. But this didn't happen and the facts of his early life are likely to remain the same forevermore.
(I did discover one untapped scource from this period - Lionel Tiger - but had run out of time by then. I hope a future biographer makes use of him).
Proofs- it is not my job to proof my own books. This is my fifth book and the first that has gone out in such an underproofed -let' say- state. The book was edited and then sent to a proffesional proof reader. This is of course the norm for any professional publisher, and Music Sales/Omnibus is more established than many. I then have a day or two to go over it myself before it goes to the printers by which time I was embarking on another project. I trust my editor, publishers and their proof readers and usually this is fine. I have to trust them. And the proof of this is that no such criticisims have met my previous books. In this case something went amiss although I would still argue against the notion that this makes the book unreadable. In fact the UK reviews thus far- on The Sky arts book programme, in Q magazine and the Metro newspaper - all positive- didn't even touch on this. (On completion, originally, I did ask for the book to be sent to previous Omnibus LC author, the mighty Jim Devlin for a check through but was told there was no time). He has since kindly gone through the first edition and his amendments applied to the second HB edition which will be out soon.
Please don't misinterpert this response as bad grace or whining. Ive had experience of all sorts of reviews in the last 15 years and its my opinion that all reviews- good or bad -contain the truth, essentially, Its just they contain the partial truth. And the negative reviews of this book seem to me to be just that, omitting most that's good and worthwhile about it, of which there is plenty. So I believe. But then maybe I would.
Anyhow, I'd hope that not too many will be put off and endevour to find out for themselves.
But to address some recurring criticisims -
I wonder how many reading this have very idealistic notions of how and why a book is written. I went into the details of my own experience with this book and writing in particular within the Heck of a Guy interview for those interested.
Time is a huge part of the process. Lack of time. There are strict deadlines a paid author has to stick to or you are in danger of not getting paid or breaking contract. I had just over a year to write about LC's life and I had to take it or leave it. (I originally asked for a minimum of two years. I also said in the HOAG interview that writing about Cohen was like writing about God except that LC isn't dead. It is a VAST life, as wide and deep as its long).
That said, it shouldn't be any concern of the reader as to what the circumstances of writing a book are but these are the facts. Given a choice I would have had as long as I wanted to write a book on the subject. This isn't the reality of the matter. This means I had to focus on a particular strain of Cohen's rich, varied life. My main interest in this case is the records. Cohen's albums. This is what turns me on most about Cohen's work. And in all my biographies, I want to write primarily about the work. I am not interested in the ambiguties of the subject's personal or sex life unless they directly affect and are involved with the work (Drugs and drink are usually staple culprits in thsi regard), in the main. I'm not even overly interested in their childhood curcumstances. ('All that Charles Dickens stuff' to paraphrase Fitzgerald).
What I am interested in his the process and the mechanisims of the music and hows it is made and how its released and how its recieved. I've a lot of experience in this field myself and this gives me a perspective that perhaps other writers don't have. (Nadel's book was a Tower of knowledge but I got the sense that for all of the many strengths in that book the author was not particularly musical). No Cohen book I'd ever read -as a fan -properly addressed his recording career and this is what I set out to do, within of course the greater context of his life. And in this I think I came back with much new and valuable insight and information. For instance, I've never read anywhere else accounts of the making of LC's first album in such detail. The same goes for the Lissauer albums, for the Spector album and in particular (my LC favourite), '10 new songs'. None of the people I interviewed for these albums - the musicians, the producers themselves - including at length Sahron Robinson and Lissauer amongst many others - had ever talked in depth about their experiences of making these records before. At least not publically. And yet anyone reading the negative comments on this board and elsewhwere would not be aware of this. I've noticed that most negative reviews of this book tend to be almost purely negative ; there is little balance given.
I never intended to cover Cohen's literary output so the fact that I didn't is hard for me to take as a criticisim. Nadel's book gives a truly comprehensive and meaningful analysis of this strain of Cohen's work and I think that would be hard to best in a general biography. Add to which, I don't rate Cohen as a novelist while at the same time I find him an unusually powerful and untypical vocalist and songwriter - as a singer and musician he is a fascinating subject to me, as a novelist a curio at best.
Regarding Cohen's early life...it would have been intruiging and exciting to discover at this stage that he had been one of twins ala Elvis or had been born with a tail and spent the first 3 years of his life underwater. But this didn't happen and the facts of his early life are likely to remain the same forevermore.
(I did discover one untapped scource from this period - Lionel Tiger - but had run out of time by then. I hope a future biographer makes use of him).
Proofs- it is not my job to proof my own books. This is my fifth book and the first that has gone out in such an underproofed -let' say- state. The book was edited and then sent to a proffesional proof reader. This is of course the norm for any professional publisher, and Music Sales/Omnibus is more established than many. I then have a day or two to go over it myself before it goes to the printers by which time I was embarking on another project. I trust my editor, publishers and their proof readers and usually this is fine. I have to trust them. And the proof of this is that no such criticisims have met my previous books. In this case something went amiss although I would still argue against the notion that this makes the book unreadable. In fact the UK reviews thus far- on The Sky arts book programme, in Q magazine and the Metro newspaper - all positive- didn't even touch on this. (On completion, originally, I did ask for the book to be sent to previous Omnibus LC author, the mighty Jim Devlin for a check through but was told there was no time). He has since kindly gone through the first edition and his amendments applied to the second HB edition which will be out soon.
Please don't misinterpert this response as bad grace or whining. Ive had experience of all sorts of reviews in the last 15 years and its my opinion that all reviews- good or bad -contain the truth, essentially, Its just they contain the partial truth. And the negative reviews of this book seem to me to be just that, omitting most that's good and worthwhile about it, of which there is plenty. So I believe. But then maybe I would.
Anyhow, I'd hope that not too many will be put off and endevour to find out for themselves.
(bold print is my doing)
