jarkko wrote: ↑Fri Jan 04, 2019 11:44 am
He doesn't hate just Leonard Cohen but us, Leonard's fans, too, just read the last paragraph of his "review".
quite so, jarkko, but it is important for both a writer and reviewer - should they yearn for attention - not to continually be received either with applause or indifference, for then they have failed.
in the nineteenth century, thomas jefferson hogg's critical biography of shelley was so opposite to that of other biographers that it stands out even today, 160 years later. shelley's reputation suffered not one iota, and hogg's attempt to reach recognition by swimming upstream was successful.
leonard would have known this, and i believe would have been greatly amused by the new york times' article. one need agree with nothing in mr logan's review, but should nevertheless give him credit for entertaining his readers with such eloquent desperation. the gentleman had obviously studied 'the flame' from cover to cover, meticulously analysed every page. what greater triumph could leonard have wished for?
in 'death to this book', (
death of a lady's man) leonard asks himself the question: "does he [leonard] really wish to negate his life and his work?" - later calling it "a worthless piece of junk". his constant self-deprecation implies that his spirit was not happy with perpetual adulation, and that he was only too aware that ego was the enemy of his creativity.
as an example of humility overpowering genius, let us finish with leonard's apologetic conclusion to 'a note to the chinese reader' (
book of longing): "beautiful losers was written outside, on a table set among the rocks, weeds and daisies, behind my house on hydra, an island in the aegean sea. i lived there many years ago. it was a blazing hot summer. i never covered my head. what you have in your hands is more of a sunstroke than a book. dear reader, please forgive me if i have wasted your time."
if leonard was nothing else, he was an excellent role model