When Letters to Monica was published in 2011, you might have been forgiven for thinking the stink left after Andrew Motion and Anthony Thwaite published Larkin's biography and Selected Letters had dispersed. After Motion's biography followed Richard Bradford's, then Maeve Brennan's memoir, and a succession of intelligent criticism to foil the scolds. Larkin topped the Times' list of the best 50 writers since World War 2, and his Collected Poems secured its place in John Carey's Pure Pleasure, a list of the best 50 books of the twentieth century. After a brief but furious debate about the man's character, it seemed, the work was as inviolate as ever. Was another biography, then, seeking to 'reinstate a man misunderstood', quite necessary?
Booth, unsurprisingly, thinks so. His credentials, at first, seem right. Booth was a colleague of Larkin's at the University of Hull for seventeen years, has published two critical studies on Larkin, is the Literary Adviser to the Philip Larkin Society, co-edits its journal, and saw an edition of Larkin's early fiction into print. His 'Larkin on Ice', presumably, is forthcoming.
Booth's credentials, while extensive, are also his major weakness. He writes as if Larkin's reputation was still locked away in a tower, awaiting the heroic Sir James to turn up and rescue it single handed. Booth's constant finger-wagging at, variously, Larkin's maltreated women, friends, acquaintances, publishers, biographers, critics, along with the weather, Hull, London, the provinces and readers of Larkin's poems other than Booth himself, is somewhat annoying.
To give credit where it's due, Booth's biography pours more smoothly than any before it. Making the life of a partially deaf, unmarried, Hull-dwelling, near-hermit Librarian sound interesting is a feat by anyone's standards. Jargon, allowing for some technical words relating to the intricacies of meter and rhyme, is all but excluded. His comments on the poems are frequently incisive, and an improvement on those Archie Burnett devoted so much space to in the 2012 edition of Larkin's Collected Poems. One particularly remembers this one, on 'Here': 'Larkin pulls out all the organ-stops of rhyme and assonance to create a sumptuous music of consonant clusters and shifting vowels, unlike any else in his poetry.'
Booth is also to be praised for reminding the scolds - Tom Paulin, Lisa Jardine (though, sadly, not Bonnie Greer) - that the man they condemned as a racist hailed Sidney Bechet and Louis Armstrong as his artistic masters. Like Bradford before him, Booth points out that every instance of Larkin's supposed deep-seated racism was in the language he used to shock his unshockable friends, usually expressed in private correspondence. The letters were evidence of a voice modulating according to its receiver. As John Banville put it, they showed 'less the grimace of a bigot than a mischievously fashioned Halloween mask.' The porn - two samples of which are included in the photo section - seem as tame and quaint as Friday the 13th Part 1.
Booth's line goes wonky when it arrives at the subject of Larkin's women. Here, Booth's mission does leads him into saying things not merely dim, but borderline despicable. Just as the editors who turned down Larkin's early jottings have to be demonised for not recognising the Genius Among Us, Booth has to brand Larkin's women as grasping, hypocritical, fame-seeking, neurotic, difficult, constantly making him 'the victim of the breadth and generosity of his sensibility and the narrowness of theirs.' Uh-huh.
I don't think it unfair to question Booth's critical judgment. Simple opinions are presented as indisputable fact. Remember the last stanza of 'High Windows'?
'Rather than words come the thought of High Windows:
The sun-comprehending glass,
And, beyond it, the deep blue air, that shows
Nothing, and is nowhere, and is endless.'
At the end of the draft version of the poem, Booth tells us, Larkin wrote as an alternative to the last three words 'and f*****g p***.' How many beside Booth would say this has 'now become an inextricable part of the poem [How, given how few have seen this version of it?]; indeed it makes it a more profound work.' Why?
Booth also contradicts himself. In the introduction, he talks of a 'critical orthodoxy' (a rather odd, self-justifying term for 'an awful lot of readers that independently reached a common conclusion') that felt Thwaite's decision to present the first edition of Larkin's Collected Poems in chronological order was no real order at all. It has its uses, as he says, for biographers and other people interested in the `soul history' of Philip Larkin. But for most readers, that was no order at all. As Clive James, who is never referenced in the entire book, once put it, when a man is so careful to arrange his works in a certain order, it is probably wiser to assume that when he subtracts something he is adding to the arrangement. If Booth disagrees, then he's entitled his opinion. What he isn't entitled to is having his cake and eating it. You can't pat yourself on the back for pointing out how carefully Larkin ordered his poems in one chapter, then pat yourself on the back elsewhere for urging people to ignore that very order. You can perhaps see why some are already saying that James' review of Larkin's Collected Poems (reprinted in Reliable Essays) managed to say more about Larkin and his work than Booth's two studies of the poet put together.
This is an enjoyable book in spite of itself, and despite its often misplaced zeal, I still think it worthy of any Larkin fan.