What do you think?
Rate this book
Genius and Lust: The Creativity and Sexuality of Cole Porter and Noel Coward
A dual biography of Noel Coward and Cole Porter examines how their sexuality shaped their careers
276 pages, Hardcover
First published September 1, 1995
19 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
August 6, 2022
Most celebrity bios have a void at the center. Divorced from their creative focus, the lives of the famous can seem to have been about little beyond egotism and self-aggrandizement, but the introduction to “Genius & Lust: The Creative and Sexual Lives of Cole Porter and Noel Coward” begins by enumerating psychologist Howard Gardener’s categories of cognitive synthesis. There follows a complaint about the dearth of research into the link between homosexuality and creativity, something the authors intend to remedy. Ah, such seriousness of purpose!
Driven to succeed by poverty, Noel Coward was armed only with wit, and Cole Porter’s life provides a vivid counterpoint. (Unconstrained by the necessity of earning a living, Porter indulged his talents at leisure.) Yet the similarities are striking. Both men sought and attained theatrical success in New York and London between the World Wars, followed by celebrity in Hollywood, and – in the style of the times – both hid their sexual natures behind ersatz relationships with women. They helped shape popular culture for decades.
But now to the real dirt.
Porter practiced the kind of promiscuity recalled these days in mythic terms, enjoying thousands of partners, almost all of them one-night stands, whereas Coward shunned “rough trade,” preferring instead to establish relationships that enhanced his career. After observing that Coward strongly defended his own privacy – “and quite rightly” – the authors provide a catalog of his liaisons, and such lascivious details as they’ve been unable to unearth are simply speculated about ... at length. Coward is described as being “gaga” with lust, while Porter is said to have been “headlong in love with life and all its emotional wonders.”
I’m not making this up.
Coupled with the authors’ gushy mode of expression is an equally lethal tendency toward generalization, peppered with inane pronouncements like “sexual contacts usually preceded lasting friendships” or “if any gay man can be absolutely sure of anyone’s unflagging love and devotion it is that of his mother.” Actual insight is notably lacking. To achieve book length, the volume depends heavily on digression (what sort of underwear Winston Churchill preferred, who Rock Hudson left his money to) and winds up highly suggestive of magazine filler.
Driven to succeed by poverty, Noel Coward was armed only with wit, and Cole Porter’s life provides a vivid counterpoint. (Unconstrained by the necessity of earning a living, Porter indulged his talents at leisure.) Yet the similarities are striking. Both men sought and attained theatrical success in New York and London between the World Wars, followed by celebrity in Hollywood, and – in the style of the times – both hid their sexual natures behind ersatz relationships with women. They helped shape popular culture for decades.
But now to the real dirt.
Porter practiced the kind of promiscuity recalled these days in mythic terms, enjoying thousands of partners, almost all of them one-night stands, whereas Coward shunned “rough trade,” preferring instead to establish relationships that enhanced his career. After observing that Coward strongly defended his own privacy – “and quite rightly” – the authors provide a catalog of his liaisons, and such lascivious details as they’ve been unable to unearth are simply speculated about ... at length. Coward is described as being “gaga” with lust, while Porter is said to have been “headlong in love with life and all its emotional wonders.”
I’m not making this up.
Coupled with the authors’ gushy mode of expression is an equally lethal tendency toward generalization, peppered with inane pronouncements like “sexual contacts usually preceded lasting friendships” or “if any gay man can be absolutely sure of anyone’s unflagging love and devotion it is that of his mother.” Actual insight is notably lacking. To achieve book length, the volume depends heavily on digression (what sort of underwear Winston Churchill preferred, who Rock Hudson left his money to) and winds up highly suggestive of magazine filler.
August 1, 2017
Most celebrity bios have a void at the center. Divorced from their creative focus, the lives of the famous can seem to have been about little beyond egotism and self-aggrandizement, but the introduction to “Genius & Lust: The Creative and Sexual Lives of Cole Porter and Noel Coward” begins by enumerating psychologist Howard Gardener’s categories of cognitive synthesis. There follows a complaint about the dearth of research into the link between homosexuality and creativity, something the authors intend to remedy. Ah, such seriousness of purpose!
Driven to succeed by poverty, Noel Coward was armed only with wit, and Cole Porter’s life provides a vivid counterpoint. (Unconstrained by the necessity of earning a living, Porter indulged his talents at leisure.) Yet the similarities are striking. Both men sought and attained theatrical success in New York and London between the World Wars, followed by celebrity in Hollywood, and – in the style of the times – both hid their sexual natures behind ersatz relationships with women. They helped shape popular culture for decades. But now to the real dirt.
Porter practiced the kind of promiscuity recalled these days in mythic terms, enjoying thousands of partners, almost all of them one-night stands, whereas Coward shunned “rough trade,” preferring instead to establish relationships that enhanced his career. After observing that Coward strongly defended his own privacy – “and quite rightly” – the authors provide a catalog of his liaisons, and such lascivious details as they’ve been unable to unearth are simply speculated about ... at length. Coward is described as being “gaga” with lust, while Porter is said to have been “headlong in love with life and all its emotional wonders.”
I’m not making this up.
Coupled with the authors’ gushy mode of expression is an equally lethal tendency toward generalization, peppered with inane pronouncements like “sexual contacts usually preceded lasting friendships” or “if any gay man can be absolutely sure of anyone’s unflagging love and devotion it is that of his mother.” Actual insight is notably lacking. To achieve book length, the volume depends heavily on digression (what sort of underwear Winston Churchill preferred, who Rock Hudson left his money to) and winds up highly suggestive of magazine filler.
Driven to succeed by poverty, Noel Coward was armed only with wit, and Cole Porter’s life provides a vivid counterpoint. (Unconstrained by the necessity of earning a living, Porter indulged his talents at leisure.) Yet the similarities are striking. Both men sought and attained theatrical success in New York and London between the World Wars, followed by celebrity in Hollywood, and – in the style of the times – both hid their sexual natures behind ersatz relationships with women. They helped shape popular culture for decades. But now to the real dirt.
Porter practiced the kind of promiscuity recalled these days in mythic terms, enjoying thousands of partners, almost all of them one-night stands, whereas Coward shunned “rough trade,” preferring instead to establish relationships that enhanced his career. After observing that Coward strongly defended his own privacy – “and quite rightly” – the authors provide a catalog of his liaisons, and such lascivious details as they’ve been unable to unearth are simply speculated about ... at length. Coward is described as being “gaga” with lust, while Porter is said to have been “headlong in love with life and all its emotional wonders.”
I’m not making this up.
Coupled with the authors’ gushy mode of expression is an equally lethal tendency toward generalization, peppered with inane pronouncements like “sexual contacts usually preceded lasting friendships” or “if any gay man can be absolutely sure of anyone’s unflagging love and devotion it is that of his mother.” Actual insight is notably lacking. To achieve book length, the volume depends heavily on digression (what sort of underwear Winston Churchill preferred, who Rock Hudson left his money to) and winds up highly suggestive of magazine filler.
Want to read
June 23, 2007Haven't read it yet, but isn't the title great?!
October 21, 2015
How vedy vedy revealing.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews