What do you think?
Rate this book
Essays in Biography
Who is the greatest living essayist writing in English? Unquestionably Joseph Epstein. Epstein is penetrating. He is witty. He has a magic touch with words, that hard-to-define but immediately recognizable quality called style. Above all, he is impossible to put down.
Joseph Epstein's The Ideal of Culture: Essays is the fourth such volume from Axios Press and contains 63 essays. Subjects range from domestic life to current social trends to an appraisal of “contemporary nuttiness.” It follows the much acclaimed Essays in Biography, 2012, A Literary Education and Other Essays, 2014, and Wind Sprints: Shorter Essays, 2016.
After reading Epstein, we see life with a fresh eye. We also see ourselves a little more clearly. This is what Plutarch intended: life teaching by example, but with a wry smile and such a sure hand that we hardly notice the instruction. It is just pure pleasure.
Joseph Epstein's The Ideal of Culture: Essays is the fourth such volume from Axios Press and contains 63 essays. Subjects range from domestic life to current social trends to an appraisal of “contemporary nuttiness.” It follows the much acclaimed Essays in Biography, 2012, A Literary Education and Other Essays, 2014, and Wind Sprints: Shorter Essays, 2016.
After reading Epstein, we see life with a fresh eye. We also see ourselves a little more clearly. This is what Plutarch intended: life teaching by example, but with a wry smile and such a sure hand that we hardly notice the instruction. It is just pure pleasure.
622 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 14, 2012
47 people are currently reading
173 people want to read
About the author
Joseph Epstein
105 books114 followersJoseph Epstein is the author of, among other books, Snobbery, Friendship, and Fabulous Small Jews. He has been editor of American Scholar and has written for the New Yorker, the Atlantic, Commentary, Town and Country, and other magazines.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews
October 29, 2012
Joseph Epstein is one of the best essayists in contemporary American letters. A traditionalist who adopts a wary view of literary trends and personalities, he takes no prisoners when confronting unwarranted reputations. Here is how his review of Sigrid Nunez's memoir of Susan Sontag begins: "Susan Sontag, as F.R. Leavis said of the Sitwells, belongs less to the history of literature than to that of publicity." Not only has Sontag been put in her place, that place is among literary predecessors who have made spectacles of themselves. Mr. Epstein is, in some respects, a throwback to the Leavis era, with its touting of a "great tradition" in literature. But Mr. Epstein is not a throwback insofar as he is constantly engaged with the present and with an impressive array of subjects: from Malcolm Gladwell to George Washington, from Alexander Solzhenitsyn to Joe DiMaggio "Essays in Biography" is divided into sections on Americans (the largest), Englishmen, popular culture and "Others." He could have included an entire section devoted to critics, since he has pieces on Dwight Macdonald, Irving Howe, Alfred Kazin and James Wolcott.
Mr. Epstein's ability to capture a subject in a memorable 3,000 words should be the envy of biographers, who write at greater length but sometimes with no greater effect. Biographies are vats of facts that take patience to digest; Mr. Epstein's essays are brilliant distillations. Biographers are rarely as nimble and pithy as he can be, and they labor under constraints he would surely chafe at. Indeed, the author once returned the advance for a biography of John Dos Passos that he had agreed to write, an enterprise that would surely have taxed his desire to say what he really thinks.
What? Biographers don't say what they think? A biography—whatever its rewards—usually comes complete with shackles. Biographers have opinions, but bald judgments are usually eschewed. The biography of Susan Sontag that I co-wrote ("Susan Sontag: The Making of an Icon") could not have begun with Mr. Epstein's first sentence; it would have been called tendentious and worse. The biographical narrative is supposed to unfold without editorializing, and most biographers will say it isn't their place to judge but to understand—although Mr. Epstein might counter that judgment is a form of understanding.
The value Mr. Epstein brings to biography is an incisive grasp of person and prose. This acuity comes out in his review of Saul Bellow's letters. Mr. Epstein knew Bellow and was in a position to observe the touchy novelist's interactions with friends. As a result, the review comes to life as both criticism and biography: "Saul had two valves on his emotional trumpet: intimacy and contempt." Here, too, a biographer can only gasp at the freedom accorded the essayist, as when he notes the "con in much of Bellow's correspondence." Mr. Epstein thinks "Herzog" works so well because of the letters the title character writes to all sorts of addressees, concluding that, "in some ways," the letter was Bellow's "true métier." This is the setup for a devastating verdict: Bellow was not "truly a novelist." He had ideas but no stories and could not shape a narrative, ending up with the "high-octane riffs" of a "philosophical schmoozer."
Mr. Epstein is to be prized for his ability to stand back from the biographical field, so to speak, while taking aboard the insights of biographers. He brings to biography what he calls "the amateur view" in an essay on George Washington, in which he draws on historians like Barry Schwartz and Gordon S. Wood. Mr. Epstein cites a chapter from Lord Bryce's "The American Commonwealth" called "Why Great Men Are Not Chosen Presidents" and embarks on an extended meditation on just why it is not quite so easy to determine if Washington was a great man.
Bryce asserts that the American voter does not mind settling for mediocrity and actually prefers someone who is safe over someone with an original or profound mind. Of Washington, Mr. Epstein asks: "Was he an authentically great man, or instead merely the right man for his time?" He then canvasses opinions about our first president, beginning with Thomas Jefferson's mixed review: Washington was not an agile thinker, proved a cautious and not particularly quick improviser as a general, and though a man of integrity and forceful leadership, had a habit of exactly calculating "every man's value." Mr. Epstein implies that historian Forrest McDonald came close to suggesting Washington was a myth that the country needed to believe in.
Perhaps only Mr. Epstein would then refer to "Pride and Prejudice," comparing the reader's tendency to identify with Elizabeth Bennet, because she is left undescribed, to Americans' desire to read into Washington traits the country most covets. Then comes a classic Epstein formulation: "Washington was famous even before he was great, monumental while still drawing breath, apotheosized while still very much alive." In 19 words, Mr. Epstein builds a biographical schema that does not have to be labored over for 300 pages.
The essayist concludes that Washington's greatness inheres in his moral character, in his "genius for discerning right action." Something similar might be said about Joseph Epstein, who brings to biography a genius of discernment that is expressed in the just and moral character of his prose.
Mr. Epstein's ability to capture a subject in a memorable 3,000 words should be the envy of biographers, who write at greater length but sometimes with no greater effect. Biographies are vats of facts that take patience to digest; Mr. Epstein's essays are brilliant distillations. Biographers are rarely as nimble and pithy as he can be, and they labor under constraints he would surely chafe at. Indeed, the author once returned the advance for a biography of John Dos Passos that he had agreed to write, an enterprise that would surely have taxed his desire to say what he really thinks.
What? Biographers don't say what they think? A biography—whatever its rewards—usually comes complete with shackles. Biographers have opinions, but bald judgments are usually eschewed. The biography of Susan Sontag that I co-wrote ("Susan Sontag: The Making of an Icon") could not have begun with Mr. Epstein's first sentence; it would have been called tendentious and worse. The biographical narrative is supposed to unfold without editorializing, and most biographers will say it isn't their place to judge but to understand—although Mr. Epstein might counter that judgment is a form of understanding.
The value Mr. Epstein brings to biography is an incisive grasp of person and prose. This acuity comes out in his review of Saul Bellow's letters. Mr. Epstein knew Bellow and was in a position to observe the touchy novelist's interactions with friends. As a result, the review comes to life as both criticism and biography: "Saul had two valves on his emotional trumpet: intimacy and contempt." Here, too, a biographer can only gasp at the freedom accorded the essayist, as when he notes the "con in much of Bellow's correspondence." Mr. Epstein thinks "Herzog" works so well because of the letters the title character writes to all sorts of addressees, concluding that, "in some ways," the letter was Bellow's "true métier." This is the setup for a devastating verdict: Bellow was not "truly a novelist." He had ideas but no stories and could not shape a narrative, ending up with the "high-octane riffs" of a "philosophical schmoozer."
Mr. Epstein is to be prized for his ability to stand back from the biographical field, so to speak, while taking aboard the insights of biographers. He brings to biography what he calls "the amateur view" in an essay on George Washington, in which he draws on historians like Barry Schwartz and Gordon S. Wood. Mr. Epstein cites a chapter from Lord Bryce's "The American Commonwealth" called "Why Great Men Are Not Chosen Presidents" and embarks on an extended meditation on just why it is not quite so easy to determine if Washington was a great man.
Bryce asserts that the American voter does not mind settling for mediocrity and actually prefers someone who is safe over someone with an original or profound mind. Of Washington, Mr. Epstein asks: "Was he an authentically great man, or instead merely the right man for his time?" He then canvasses opinions about our first president, beginning with Thomas Jefferson's mixed review: Washington was not an agile thinker, proved a cautious and not particularly quick improviser as a general, and though a man of integrity and forceful leadership, had a habit of exactly calculating "every man's value." Mr. Epstein implies that historian Forrest McDonald came close to suggesting Washington was a myth that the country needed to believe in.
Perhaps only Mr. Epstein would then refer to "Pride and Prejudice," comparing the reader's tendency to identify with Elizabeth Bennet, because she is left undescribed, to Americans' desire to read into Washington traits the country most covets. Then comes a classic Epstein formulation: "Washington was famous even before he was great, monumental while still drawing breath, apotheosized while still very much alive." In 19 words, Mr. Epstein builds a biographical schema that does not have to be labored over for 300 pages.
The essayist concludes that Washington's greatness inheres in his moral character, in his "genius for discerning right action." Something similar might be said about Joseph Epstein, who brings to biography a genius of discernment that is expressed in the just and moral character of his prose.
May 7, 2023
Well writ and interesting musings and opinions on the literati (angling rightward if you will).
December 11, 2013
Joseph Epstein must be acknowledged as the supreme essayist of our time. In this book, he tackles individuals ranging from George Washington to Alfred Kinsey and various in between with his customary combination of erudition and elan. Many of these essays honor and admire their subjects, a few skin them alive. I particularly enjoyed the profiles of Washington, Santayana, Bellow, Malamud, Max Beerbohm, T.S. Eliot, George Gershwin and Erich Heller.
October 20, 2012
I've read all of Epstein's essay collections and this was the one I have liked least. He wears his biases on his sleeve here--something that annoys me regardless of whether I agree with them or not. Perhaps it is not a coincidence that his humor was not as evident here as in his other collections.
January 9, 2026
Joseph Epstein is an American treasure, a grouchy, opinionated, plain spoken treasure. He is our greatest living essayist. He has also written some short stories and a few books, but his essays are his claim to fame.
Like all good essayists he has strong opinions. "What is it about the study of philosophy that tends to make brilliant minds stupid when it comes down to what are known as actual cases." (He clinches his point by using the examples of Martin Heidegger, Bertrand Russell, Jean Paul-Satre and Ludwig Wittgenstein, all of whom did poorly when faced with the real world they lived in.)
He also turns a nice phrase. Saul Bellow "did not need wives for inspiration but ex-wives to attack in new novels." or "Three things he (Joseph Liebling) admired above all else; courage, craft and con." or "First Jack, then Bobby, ultimately the entire clan- (Arthur) Schlesinger seems never to have meet a Kennedy he did not adore." (the "adore" adds the right level of sting.)
He also enjoys sliding in jokes. "The Bloomsbury Group- a name that today sounds suspiciously like a dubious hedge fund- stood opposed to everything the Victorians stood for." That is a particularly clever crack because, in general, he views the Bloomsbury Group as a dubious group.
This book is a 2012 collection of biographical essays. Most of them seem to have started as book reviews of new biographies or letter collections. It is frustrating that there is no listing of exactly when and where the essays originally appeared. For example, the essay of Time Magazine's Henry Luce seems to have been written while the magazine was still flying high. It would help to have a date of first publication.
Epstein is fascinated by the New York intellectuals of the 1930s, 40s, and 50s. Dwight Mc Donald, Gore Vidal, Irving Kristol, Alfred Kazin, and Suisan Sontag all get chapters. He is also interested in the high culture Englishmen of the same period. T. S. Eliot (an Englishman for these purposes.), Cyril Connolly, Isiah Berlin, Max Beerbohm and Maurice Bowra each get discussed.
One of his particular concerns is asking, "was he good for the Jews?'. He almost always looks at his subjects' statements on Jews and Israel as part of his evaluation. He observes the "But it is the coarseness of Santayana's remarks about Jews, coming from an otherwise so refined intelligence, that is so unsettling" or "Jews and academics are bound together in (Gore) Vidal's contempt."
Interestingly, Epstein chronicles the crude anti-Semetic stereotypes in T. S. Eliot's poetry. I was startled to read Epstein's conclusion on Eliot, who he greatly admires. "But might it be allowed that that one can write or say anti-Semetic things without being an anti-Semite? Eliot is guilty of the former but does not, I think, stand guilty of the latter.".
He also has essays on a cross section of nonliterary types which he is interested in like, George Washington, W. C. Fields, Michael Jordan, and George Gershwin, as well as several remembrances of old friends.
It is enjoyable to read a witty, stylish, well-informed writer discussing interesting people
Like all good essayists he has strong opinions. "What is it about the study of philosophy that tends to make brilliant minds stupid when it comes down to what are known as actual cases." (He clinches his point by using the examples of Martin Heidegger, Bertrand Russell, Jean Paul-Satre and Ludwig Wittgenstein, all of whom did poorly when faced with the real world they lived in.)
He also turns a nice phrase. Saul Bellow "did not need wives for inspiration but ex-wives to attack in new novels." or "Three things he (Joseph Liebling) admired above all else; courage, craft and con." or "First Jack, then Bobby, ultimately the entire clan- (Arthur) Schlesinger seems never to have meet a Kennedy he did not adore." (the "adore" adds the right level of sting.)
He also enjoys sliding in jokes. "The Bloomsbury Group- a name that today sounds suspiciously like a dubious hedge fund- stood opposed to everything the Victorians stood for." That is a particularly clever crack because, in general, he views the Bloomsbury Group as a dubious group.
This book is a 2012 collection of biographical essays. Most of them seem to have started as book reviews of new biographies or letter collections. It is frustrating that there is no listing of exactly when and where the essays originally appeared. For example, the essay of Time Magazine's Henry Luce seems to have been written while the magazine was still flying high. It would help to have a date of first publication.
Epstein is fascinated by the New York intellectuals of the 1930s, 40s, and 50s. Dwight Mc Donald, Gore Vidal, Irving Kristol, Alfred Kazin, and Suisan Sontag all get chapters. He is also interested in the high culture Englishmen of the same period. T. S. Eliot (an Englishman for these purposes.), Cyril Connolly, Isiah Berlin, Max Beerbohm and Maurice Bowra each get discussed.
One of his particular concerns is asking, "was he good for the Jews?'. He almost always looks at his subjects' statements on Jews and Israel as part of his evaluation. He observes the "But it is the coarseness of Santayana's remarks about Jews, coming from an otherwise so refined intelligence, that is so unsettling" or "Jews and academics are bound together in (Gore) Vidal's contempt."
Interestingly, Epstein chronicles the crude anti-Semetic stereotypes in T. S. Eliot's poetry. I was startled to read Epstein's conclusion on Eliot, who he greatly admires. "But might it be allowed that that one can write or say anti-Semetic things without being an anti-Semite? Eliot is guilty of the former but does not, I think, stand guilty of the latter.".
He also has essays on a cross section of nonliterary types which he is interested in like, George Washington, W. C. Fields, Michael Jordan, and George Gershwin, as well as several remembrances of old friends.
It is enjoyable to read a witty, stylish, well-informed writer discussing interesting people
March 24, 2017
The biographer's curse is to never really get across everything they might wish to say about their subject. Fortunately, Joseph Epstein is not a carrier of this curse. Requiring only 10-15 pages per subject, the reader of Essays in Biography is allowed an interesting, critical, and enlightening look into a plethora of individuals of differing character, abilities, and contributions to society.
With a cast as diverse as George Washington, Saul Bellow, T.S. Eliot, and Xenophon, there really is enough in this volume for any reader to enjoy, especially one that enjoys refreshingly honest and direct writing. Epstein is a uniquely talented writer of essays. Many of these essays, written across the decades of his career, begin as book reviews, and thus allow us not just to see Epstein's opinion of the person he is writing about, but also to see his thoughts on the perception of his subject. With this in mind, I've learned a great deal of new and absorbing information about people I'd know of, (like Adlai Stevenson, Arthur Schlesinger, T.S. Eliot, Alfred Kinsey, or Joe Dimaggio), and learned for the first time about characters like Susan Sontag, Henry Luce, Maurice Bowra, and Hugh Trevor-Roper.
The most elegant and carefully written essays were on some of Epstein's friends, including John Frederick Nims, John Gross, and Matthew Shanahan. The essay on Shanahan, an unknown, blind, older gentleman from Chicago that Epstein befriended when Shanahan was in his eighties and has since died, was a very touching account that shows the emotional range that Epstein can write in. It can be compared with his driving critique of Susan Sontag to convey Epstein's ability to be unbelievably kind when dealing with those he sees as noble (and one is led to agree) and to be bitingly critical of those he sees as falling short (again, one is forced to agree with his analysis). I learned a great deal about life, about the literary world, about the impact of Jewish writers on America's collective literary tradition, and about what it means to carefully judge someone's impact on the world. A very good collection of essays from a splendid writer.
With a cast as diverse as George Washington, Saul Bellow, T.S. Eliot, and Xenophon, there really is enough in this volume for any reader to enjoy, especially one that enjoys refreshingly honest and direct writing. Epstein is a uniquely talented writer of essays. Many of these essays, written across the decades of his career, begin as book reviews, and thus allow us not just to see Epstein's opinion of the person he is writing about, but also to see his thoughts on the perception of his subject. With this in mind, I've learned a great deal of new and absorbing information about people I'd know of, (like Adlai Stevenson, Arthur Schlesinger, T.S. Eliot, Alfred Kinsey, or Joe Dimaggio), and learned for the first time about characters like Susan Sontag, Henry Luce, Maurice Bowra, and Hugh Trevor-Roper.
The most elegant and carefully written essays were on some of Epstein's friends, including John Frederick Nims, John Gross, and Matthew Shanahan. The essay on Shanahan, an unknown, blind, older gentleman from Chicago that Epstein befriended when Shanahan was in his eighties and has since died, was a very touching account that shows the emotional range that Epstein can write in. It can be compared with his driving critique of Susan Sontag to convey Epstein's ability to be unbelievably kind when dealing with those he sees as noble (and one is led to agree) and to be bitingly critical of those he sees as falling short (again, one is forced to agree with his analysis). I learned a great deal about life, about the literary world, about the impact of Jewish writers on America's collective literary tradition, and about what it means to carefully judge someone's impact on the world. A very good collection of essays from a splendid writer.
January 18, 2019
Joseph Epstein’s breadth of interests, concise prose, and thorough topical analysis (often accomplished in surprisingly, and refreshingly, few pages) is always enough to keep me engaged and entertained as a reader. Whatever, or whoever, the subject, Professor Epstein can reliably command my attention to his writing.
The essays in this collection contain few exceptions to this. However, I occasionally felt that the title to this book should instead be Essays from Biographies, rather than Essays in Biography. Several of the essays read like slightly detached summaries of the scholarly biographies that, upon the author’s reading them, inspired their creation. Just when summary seems poised to give way to extended personal criticism, the essays often seem to end abruptly, with a page or two of slightly shallow authorial evaluation of the essay’s subject tacked on in conclusion.
Professor Epstein is clearly at his best when writing either about his own history or about those persons he’s directly met and known, and this is perhaps best demonstrated by the strength of the final essay on the only non-celebrity, Matthew Shanahan, in this collection. Professor Epstein portrays Mr. Shanahan, a retired post office employee and personal friend of the author, as richly and realistically as any of the high profile, cultural titans discussed elsewhere in the text.
In the end, I finished this collection with my curiosity for many of the subjects written about both satisfied on an elementary level and aroused to further, more focused future study. I think this is what the author most intended: for his readers to have enough of a taste of the life at the center of each essay to decide whether one wants to learn more about it. As an occasionally uneven biographical sampler, this work ultimately succeeds.
The essays in this collection contain few exceptions to this. However, I occasionally felt that the title to this book should instead be Essays from Biographies, rather than Essays in Biography. Several of the essays read like slightly detached summaries of the scholarly biographies that, upon the author’s reading them, inspired their creation. Just when summary seems poised to give way to extended personal criticism, the essays often seem to end abruptly, with a page or two of slightly shallow authorial evaluation of the essay’s subject tacked on in conclusion.
Professor Epstein is clearly at his best when writing either about his own history or about those persons he’s directly met and known, and this is perhaps best demonstrated by the strength of the final essay on the only non-celebrity, Matthew Shanahan, in this collection. Professor Epstein portrays Mr. Shanahan, a retired post office employee and personal friend of the author, as richly and realistically as any of the high profile, cultural titans discussed elsewhere in the text.
In the end, I finished this collection with my curiosity for many of the subjects written about both satisfied on an elementary level and aroused to further, more focused future study. I think this is what the author most intended: for his readers to have enough of a taste of the life at the center of each essay to decide whether one wants to learn more about it. As an occasionally uneven biographical sampler, this work ultimately succeeds.
March 12, 2018
Joseph Epstein's "Essays in Biography" functions partly as literary criticism, partly as revisionist accounts of the 42 lives under review. Each chapter is devoted to a different person of interest (a political, cultural, or historical figure--41 of them male, 1 female) and his/her biographer. The writing is pointed, witty, often poetic, and highly opinionated. There are a few patterns I noticed throughout the book: 1. If Epstein personally knew the person he writes about, they are almost always viewed favorably UNLESS that person spoke ill towards the essayist. 2. The most polarizing essays are the funnest to read (positives TS Eliot, Michael Jordan vs. negatives Malcolm Gladwell, Saul Bellow). 3. If a subject has made statements about his/her minority status that are not simply self deprecating, Epstein tends to react negatively & uses it against them.
Overall, his book was an interesting twist on the literary form and I enjoyed learning about his subjects (most of whom I hadn't heard of before). He does have a knack at describing the essence of a person in just a few pages; the best examples are Malcolm Gladwell, Ralph Ellison, and Matthew Shanahan. To me, however, several chapters were lukewarm & just uninteresting, even with Epstein's first-rate style. A few chapters were compiled from various publications (New Yorker, Washington Post, etc.), so it's understandable why a publisher would simply want to publish a full compilation. However, omitting ~20% of the book would have made it the perfect length for me.
Overall, his book was an interesting twist on the literary form and I enjoyed learning about his subjects (most of whom I hadn't heard of before). He does have a knack at describing the essence of a person in just a few pages; the best examples are Malcolm Gladwell, Ralph Ellison, and Matthew Shanahan. To me, however, several chapters were lukewarm & just uninteresting, even with Epstein's first-rate style. A few chapters were compiled from various publications (New Yorker, Washington Post, etc.), so it's understandable why a publisher would simply want to publish a full compilation. However, omitting ~20% of the book would have made it the perfect length for me.
January 3, 2021
Although these essays are literate and often witty, I don't recommend this collection. Its essays are frequently thin and mean spirited. They feel more like rhetorical exercises in support of political and cultural postures than instructive accounts of a life well - or ill - lived. They reveal more about what the author feels about the subject than how and why the subject lived as s/he did. Consequently they have a way of showing more about how the author wants to be known than about how the subject might usefully be understood. Since it is identified as essays in biography I was expecting more of the latter.
June 28, 2020
Fascinating to read about Ralph Ellison.
January 4, 2023
Epstein is a master essayist and stylist. There are no extra words, each one flows so smoothly you can just lose yourself on an effortless and rewarding journey without even trying.
January 1, 2013
Informed and pleasurable writing. Will read more of his work. Gives many reading ideas. Beautiful dedication.
notes, quotes
33..H adams & h James...adams availed himself of that opiate of the rich and bored: travel--exotic, almost relentless travel
41..santayana..read at morn, as reward..detachment..serenity..a calming effect
47..S.'s Letters, 48-52...holzberger editor (READ)
not possessing things nor being possessed by them
147..Prufrock parody: grow old, grow old, grow cold
156..rosenfeld..1949 Commentary, keeping kosher the reason for Jewish repression of sexuality...Kashruth should be permitted only to Hasidim
165..Bellow: no storyteller...touchy
180..Malamud leitmotif, life is sad
184..THE FIXER (plus A Bates movie)
185..The Assistant 1957..based on the honorable sadness of his father's life in his hardscrabble Brooklyn grocery store
239..Kazin..allergic to contentment
241..women satisfying themselves upon me as if I were a bedpost
244..the other side of sentimentality is often brutality (wife beating)
249..irving Kristol..a genius of temperament
272..Liebling unable to follow the sensible regimen of his idol Col. Stingo, who proclaimed: I have 3 rules of keeping in condition. I will not let guileful women move in on me, I decline all responsibility, and I shun EXACTIOUS LUXURIES, lest I become their slave.
279..John F Nims...terrific guy...READ him
285..sontag..the type that Lenin called "useful idiot"..n vietnam visit: white race is the cancer of human history.
re 9-11: america had it coming
286..santayana, Germans are utterly devoid of the emotion of boredom
294..beerbohm: N John Hall: MAX B, A KIND OF LIFE
when explaining a motive, "i may be wrong", or "But these are merely biographer's fancies"...a refreshing and admirable casualness
298..claimed to lack envy and ambition, wanting only to "make good use of such little talents as I had, to lead a pleasant life, to do no harm, to pass muster."
315..M Bowra (gay), when told the woman he was courting was a lesbian, "Buggers can't be choosers"
335..Eliot: I grow old...I grow old...
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
381..John Gross: literary editor, hilite TLS 74-81
Shylock: 400 yrs in the life of a legend 1992..READ
387..the truth may be that John hadn't the egotism and vanity, the pushiness and self-absorption, required of the true writer. (Please not to ask how I know about these requisite qualities.) HA!
412..charles van doren..."21"
Movie Quiz Show portrayed corruption of capitalism, but men of integrity shut them down, under the existing capitalist order
415..detached self-contentment
WC Fields
429..one of the great comic voices of all time
431..2 characters, hi-toned grouchy con man, and the greatly put-upon husband, or "sucker"
Its a Gift, 1934
441..I Thalberg, considered actors a species of children
465..Dimaggio despised Kennedy's & Clinton as sexual predators
482..James Wolcott: overwrought prose..slathers lavishly on all subjects..full of false energy and sloppy phrasing
Didion's current professional mourner phase
491..M Gladwell..rubbish
505..erich heller..1911-1990 READ
507...a good listener, which is rare for a professor(among profs, there is no listening--only waiting)
praising; Mann...refered to praise as Vitamin P, and preferred to take it in large doses
Never a complainer,..lashed to O2 & IV-feeding machine, fatigued by emphysema, contemplating life without health, "I suppose it's not really worth it"..But then, the student of German philosophy right up to the end, added "the will overrode the capacity for reasoning, and so one lived on."
544..Xenophon..the goodness of his humor, and his constant cheerfulness and playfulness of temper, always free from anything of moroseness or haughtiness, made him more attractive even to his old age, than themost beautiful and youthful men of the nation.
556..My Friend Matt...lovely..
558..a set of stds and values bred by the Depression and WWII that seemed to be on their way out.
563..Matt played on thru blindness, old age, felt life closing in on him, and kept his poise, humor, and high spirits.
notes, quotes
33..H adams & h James...adams availed himself of that opiate of the rich and bored: travel--exotic, almost relentless travel
41..santayana..read at morn, as reward..detachment..serenity..a calming effect
47..S.'s Letters, 48-52...holzberger editor (READ)
not possessing things nor being possessed by them
147..Prufrock parody: grow old, grow old, grow cold
156..rosenfeld..1949 Commentary, keeping kosher the reason for Jewish repression of sexuality...Kashruth should be permitted only to Hasidim
165..Bellow: no storyteller...touchy
180..Malamud leitmotif, life is sad
184..THE FIXER (plus A Bates movie)
185..The Assistant 1957..based on the honorable sadness of his father's life in his hardscrabble Brooklyn grocery store
239..Kazin..allergic to contentment
241..women satisfying themselves upon me as if I were a bedpost
244..the other side of sentimentality is often brutality (wife beating)
249..irving Kristol..a genius of temperament
272..Liebling unable to follow the sensible regimen of his idol Col. Stingo, who proclaimed: I have 3 rules of keeping in condition. I will not let guileful women move in on me, I decline all responsibility, and I shun EXACTIOUS LUXURIES, lest I become their slave.
279..John F Nims...terrific guy...READ him
285..sontag..the type that Lenin called "useful idiot"..n vietnam visit: white race is the cancer of human history.
re 9-11: america had it coming
286..santayana, Germans are utterly devoid of the emotion of boredom
294..beerbohm: N John Hall: MAX B, A KIND OF LIFE
when explaining a motive, "i may be wrong", or "But these are merely biographer's fancies"...a refreshing and admirable casualness
298..claimed to lack envy and ambition, wanting only to "make good use of such little talents as I had, to lead a pleasant life, to do no harm, to pass muster."
315..M Bowra (gay), when told the woman he was courting was a lesbian, "Buggers can't be choosers"
335..Eliot: I grow old...I grow old...
I shall wear the bottoms of my trousers rolled.
381..John Gross: literary editor, hilite TLS 74-81
Shylock: 400 yrs in the life of a legend 1992..READ
387..the truth may be that John hadn't the egotism and vanity, the pushiness and self-absorption, required of the true writer. (Please not to ask how I know about these requisite qualities.) HA!
412..charles van doren..."21"
Movie Quiz Show portrayed corruption of capitalism, but men of integrity shut them down, under the existing capitalist order
415..detached self-contentment
WC Fields
429..one of the great comic voices of all time
431..2 characters, hi-toned grouchy con man, and the greatly put-upon husband, or "sucker"
Its a Gift, 1934
441..I Thalberg, considered actors a species of children
465..Dimaggio despised Kennedy's & Clinton as sexual predators
482..James Wolcott: overwrought prose..slathers lavishly on all subjects..full of false energy and sloppy phrasing
Didion's current professional mourner phase
491..M Gladwell..rubbish
505..erich heller..1911-1990 READ
507...a good listener, which is rare for a professor(among profs, there is no listening--only waiting)
praising; Mann...refered to praise as Vitamin P, and preferred to take it in large doses
Never a complainer,..lashed to O2 & IV-feeding machine, fatigued by emphysema, contemplating life without health, "I suppose it's not really worth it"..But then, the student of German philosophy right up to the end, added "the will overrode the capacity for reasoning, and so one lived on."
544..Xenophon..the goodness of his humor, and his constant cheerfulness and playfulness of temper, always free from anything of moroseness or haughtiness, made him more attractive even to his old age, than themost beautiful and youthful men of the nation.
556..My Friend Matt...lovely..
558..a set of stds and values bred by the Depression and WWII that seemed to be on their way out.
563..Matt played on thru blindness, old age, felt life closing in on him, and kept his poise, humor, and high spirits.
February 6, 2014
Far be it from me to critique Joseph Epstein’s writing. He is one of the most elegant and mellifluous writers I know of. No matter the subject, one is carried along by his conversational and intelligent prose. I enjoy reading everything he writes – when I see his byline in the Wall Street Journal, it is always the first article I read. While reading this book I frequently found myself Googling his work (more on that below); once I came across an essay (“Old Age and Other Laughs”, Commentary, March 2012) that I read start to finish on my iPhone, standing at the kitchen counter. It is no exaggeration to say of Epstein, as he says of Erich Heller in this book, “I…read those essays…and was immensely impressed by them: by their elegance, by their learning, by their power, by the excitement with which he was able to imbue his dramatization of the ideas that stirred and shaped the writers that most interested him…”. He is witty and intellectual and a regular Joe, to boot. (I will never share Epstein’s appreciation of Proust, however.)
But this is an odd collection of previously published essays. They are tied together by being “biographical” but the subjects are all over the map, from George Washington to Saul Bellow, Irving Kristol to Arthur Schlesinger, George Eliot to Alfred Kinsey, Joe DiMaggio to Xenophon. Most are reviews of books about the subject personage, rather than being “biographical” in the strictest sense. The organization is haphazard, divided into four sections: Americans, Englishmen, Popular Culture, and Others, in no particular order, chronological or otherwise. Moreover, nowhere in the volume is the original publication date provided; the pieces were originally written anywhere from 1968 to 2012, and knowing where in this yawning timeframe a particular essay falls is essential to understanding context. So I Googled each and every one as I went and scribbled the original publication and date in my copy. How convenient it might have been for the publisher to do this – or is the assumption that in the age of Google background facts like this are superfluous? As Epstein says in his review of Saul Bellow’s letters, this collection is “lazily edited”.
None of which detracts one iota from the sheer pleasure of being regaled by Uncle Joe on T.S. Eliot, W.C. Fields, V.S. Naipaul or any other subject for that matter. (OK, the piece on Adlai Stevenson was not that much fun...)
But this is an odd collection of previously published essays. They are tied together by being “biographical” but the subjects are all over the map, from George Washington to Saul Bellow, Irving Kristol to Arthur Schlesinger, George Eliot to Alfred Kinsey, Joe DiMaggio to Xenophon. Most are reviews of books about the subject personage, rather than being “biographical” in the strictest sense. The organization is haphazard, divided into four sections: Americans, Englishmen, Popular Culture, and Others, in no particular order, chronological or otherwise. Moreover, nowhere in the volume is the original publication date provided; the pieces were originally written anywhere from 1968 to 2012, and knowing where in this yawning timeframe a particular essay falls is essential to understanding context. So I Googled each and every one as I went and scribbled the original publication and date in my copy. How convenient it might have been for the publisher to do this – or is the assumption that in the age of Google background facts like this are superfluous? As Epstein says in his review of Saul Bellow’s letters, this collection is “lazily edited”.
None of which detracts one iota from the sheer pleasure of being regaled by Uncle Joe on T.S. Eliot, W.C. Fields, V.S. Naipaul or any other subject for that matter. (OK, the piece on Adlai Stevenson was not that much fun...)
August 21, 2014
Reading essays has become my new obsession. Joseph Epstein' s challenge me; his subjects, his syntax, and his vocabulary (at times eccentric and/or archaic) Epstein voice strong and personal opinions his selections. Starting of by harshly calling George Washington's mediocrity which sets me on edge, but continued reading provoked to really think about what Epstein was saying about American and the presidency. So the essays continue to much the same. Many times he seems to genuinely dislike his subjects, their personalities, their writings, their politics.
ex: Reviewing a bio of Ralph Ellison: "This biography is, in short, a lynching and the coarse rope used to hand the victim is political correctness." of Bernard Malamud: "He believed in revision as a form of truth seeking.... ". I am not even sure what Epstein is saying here: "Max Beerbohm was the world's greatest minor writer, with the full oxymoronic quality behind that epithet entirely intended." He could be cold! Though his bias is clear, he offers me, as the reader, a chance to make my own judgement of the biographee. My problem are not with the content essays but that there is no introduction, explanation of selection, time and date for these essays or where and if these were earlier published. These additions could only add to the his significance judgement of the men. (Oh yes there were 2 women out of 40! But that is another issue)
ex: Reviewing a bio of Ralph Ellison: "This biography is, in short, a lynching and the coarse rope used to hand the victim is political correctness." of Bernard Malamud: "He believed in revision as a form of truth seeking.... ". I am not even sure what Epstein is saying here: "Max Beerbohm was the world's greatest minor writer, with the full oxymoronic quality behind that epithet entirely intended." He could be cold! Though his bias is clear, he offers me, as the reader, a chance to make my own judgement of the biographee. My problem are not with the content essays but that there is no introduction, explanation of selection, time and date for these essays or where and if these were earlier published. These additions could only add to the his significance judgement of the men. (Oh yes there were 2 women out of 40! But that is another issue)
April 26, 2014
There is everything to love about reading Joseph Epstein's works, provided you don't mind looking up words that seem to endless spring from his brilliant insightful mind. I have read most of his works and enjoyed them thoroughly. This book, Essays in Biography contains short essays on the lives of writers, notable figures and members of an intellectual world that has unfortunately waned. The flaws, the strengths, the brilliance and the dark sides are all commented upon with a flare that is unique to JE. I feel renewed after reading because it's a level or six up from the ability of most current writers. Give your brain a lift and read this book.
August 10, 2013
I'm a huge biography fan, and Epstein is a master at the short biography. His voice is strong, his research solid, his conclusions always compelling. I may disagree with him, but I respect his perspective. Warning: Epstein brings a conservative perspective to much of his writing, so if you are a liberal and usually only seek out works that reinforce your own ideological inclinations, this probably isn't for you. I do not consider myself a conservative, but I read him for his writing and thought-provoking opinions.
August 24, 2014
This book's stature is reduced when Epstein allows his politics to color his essays. If he doesn't like Susan Sontag's politics, I think it would be better to not write the essay. I believe that he's at his best when he's not praising nor denigrating. The final essay on his friend, Matthew Shanahan, was touching. I always learn something when I read Epstein and both his vocabulary and style are enjoyable; but in these last two books of essays his emphasis on politics has diminished that enjoyment.
November 28, 2012
JE is a fine essayist, as you probably know; this is a collection of his biographical essays. Those about the intellectuals and authors of the 50s and 60s whom he knew are especially interesting and entertaining.
January 30, 2013
On Pauline Kael: "She was always brilliant and frequently wrong. She could treat a throwaway movie like Popeye as if it were Pindar. Moral seriousness in movies seemed to infuriate her; she would supply that on her own."
May 22, 2021
Almost every time I read a book by Joseph Epstein, I feel like I just accomplished classes in history and the humanities. This one took it up step higher on the literary ladder--a whole semester. Thanks to Mr Epstein, I think I can now qualify as a certified autodidact.
November 15, 2012
Many chapters, each one a mini bio essay clearly written of mostly major intellectual figures of the 20th Century (with some exceptions.)
January 1, 2013
a book for the cultivated general reader (if there are any of those left). only animadversion: epstein too pre-occupied with 'the jewish question'.
March 3, 2013
Dipping into this ... not going to read every word of this big book.
February 3, 2013
Exactly what the title says - dozens of 10-15 page biographical essays, many of literary types.
July 12, 2013
Too often willing to indulge in gossip about liberals who were once his friends,
February 14, 2016
I enjoyed a few of these. Gotta' say it's a bit of a shock that a writer of this stature can examine the lives of so many notable people of our day and include only two women.
December 7, 2015
Good, opinionated group of essays, mostly literary.
January 25, 2013
Loving it. Essay on T.S. Eliot is simply brilliant and he is a thread in a number of other essays.
Displaying 1 - 28 of 28 reviews