Scan barcode
A review by socraticgadfly
Edison by Edmund Morris
2.0
Ye gads, NO!!!
There was a creative new angle for Morris in penning the life of Edison (see end of review) but not the one he actually took.
No, this just doesn’t work.
I’ve read an occasional non-chronological, thematically organized biography. Where it’s not intended to be an introductory biography, and may be somewhat professionally targeted, such as Heiko Oberman’s Luther bio, it can work well.
I have never read a reverse chronological biography, and now, I’ll never try another.
First, this is the same Edmund Morris who invented a fictional character for his Reagan bio and claimed it was because he couldn’t grasp Reagan. That would seem to be a lie, and that idea mainly just a literary conceit as is the reverse chronology here.
Critics slammed Morris for that.
Speaking of? You won’t see any blurbs — none at all — on the back cover here. Yes, I know he died earlier this year. Nonetheless, this isn’t a novel dependent on the author’s name, and even if there were some degree of rush, galley proofs would have been ready by May.
So, either Random House quailed at sending it to Kirkus, NY Review of Books, etc., or else it did and they slammed it.
That also doesn’t look good.
As for the book itself, you could do as one other low-star reviewer suggests and read it in normal chronological order, ie, reverse chapter order.
However, some placement-early chapters may refer forward, or is that backward, to late-placement, but earlier-chronology, chapters.
Second problem, and one that an “artiste” biographer like Morris should never have stepped into, if he is indeed such an “artiste.” Lives don’t divide on precise decadal lines, and certainly not “one decade = one theme.” It looks like he tried to take a thematic approach, a la Oberman to Luther, and straitjacket it inside a chronological format. And that on top of doing the reverse chronology.
The sad thing?
I’d never before read much about Edison’s personal life, other than his hanging out with Ford and Firestone.
I didn’t know he was married twice. Nor that his namesake eldest son from his first marriage was a wastrel. Nor that he, and to some degree all the children of the first marriage, were written off by not only Edison’s second wife, but Edison himself.
It seems like there was potential for a HUGE biography of Edison the person first, inventor second. And Morris blew it. What I have learned about Edison the person is the only reason I didn’t one-star this book.
Maybe somebody will come along and do the bio Morris could and should have done.
There was a creative new angle for Morris in penning the life of Edison (see end of review) but not the one he actually took.
No, this just doesn’t work.
I’ve read an occasional non-chronological, thematically organized biography. Where it’s not intended to be an introductory biography, and may be somewhat professionally targeted, such as Heiko Oberman’s Luther bio, it can work well.
I have never read a reverse chronological biography, and now, I’ll never try another.
First, this is the same Edmund Morris who invented a fictional character for his Reagan bio and claimed it was because he couldn’t grasp Reagan. That would seem to be a lie, and that idea mainly just a literary conceit as is the reverse chronology here.
Critics slammed Morris for that.
Speaking of? You won’t see any blurbs — none at all — on the back cover here. Yes, I know he died earlier this year. Nonetheless, this isn’t a novel dependent on the author’s name, and even if there were some degree of rush, galley proofs would have been ready by May.
So, either Random House quailed at sending it to Kirkus, NY Review of Books, etc., or else it did and they slammed it.
That also doesn’t look good.
As for the book itself, you could do as one other low-star reviewer suggests and read it in normal chronological order, ie, reverse chapter order.
However, some placement-early chapters may refer forward, or is that backward, to late-placement, but earlier-chronology, chapters.
Second problem, and one that an “artiste” biographer like Morris should never have stepped into, if he is indeed such an “artiste.” Lives don’t divide on precise decadal lines, and certainly not “one decade = one theme.” It looks like he tried to take a thematic approach, a la Oberman to Luther, and straitjacket it inside a chronological format. And that on top of doing the reverse chronology.
The sad thing?
I’d never before read much about Edison’s personal life, other than his hanging out with Ford and Firestone.
I didn’t know he was married twice. Nor that his namesake eldest son from his first marriage was a wastrel. Nor that he, and to some degree all the children of the first marriage, were written off by not only Edison’s second wife, but Edison himself.
It seems like there was potential for a HUGE biography of Edison the person first, inventor second. And Morris blew it. What I have learned about Edison the person is the only reason I didn’t one-star this book.
Maybe somebody will come along and do the bio Morris could and should have done.