Did you like this review as much as you like reading Malcolm?
But is the book any good?
A fascinating writer. I met her in the 1950s at the University of Michigan where her talents were already obvious. She edited a campus magazine that published a satirical treatment of The New Yorker magazine and was soon working there. An audition?
1
Interesting description of her turn of phrase as delicious. Obviously a smart and talented writer, I have always been suspicious of Malcolm's ability to skew an accurate portrayal through stylistic flourishes. Delicious, yes. Reliable, maybe.
3
No mention of the infamous 1983 case in which Malcolm was found to have fabricated quotes attributed to Jeffrey Masson, including one in which he calls himself an"intellectual gigolo." That's a significant omission in this too-glowing review.
7
@Betsy Hurray for Janet Malcolm! A brilliant writer--and this incisive review is well-earned.
1
This is the second review of this book the paper has published. I assume this is because the first wasn't flattering?
1
@Jennifer Nope. The NYT often publishes two reviews of a book--one in the weekday edition, one in the weekend book review. Often, the two reviewers disagree with each other.
2
@Jennifer
The NYT often publishes dual reviews of the same work--one by an outside reviewer (a well-known writer, or academic or other professional with knowledge of or interest in the subject), and another by an in-house reviewer. I find it helpful to have more than one viewpoint presented--and certainly, the dual reviews do not, and probably should not, always agree.
I first read Malcolm when she opened new ways of considering Sylvia Plath in The Silent Woman and it blew me away. I learned recently that Janet Malcolm was born in Czechoslovakia and immigrated to the US just before the war as a young child. Mr. Mason, in his review, has revealed Malcolm's virtuosity in language, but even more in her ability to understand and comprehend individuals as they are beneath the surface. Her well-educated parents no doubt contributed to her erudition early on. It would be interesting to know how early she became fluent in English, whether or not she spoke or wrote perhaps Czech or German.
4
I'm excited to see this new book by Janet Malcolm. I think she is one of our best and most intelligent writers. You don't have to agree with every observation she makes, that's not the point. I am always interested to learn what she thinks. Like all good writers she invites you to think about the subjects she writes about in ways you might not otherwise. It's great to have this collection of her writings in one book. The cover also looks pretty awesome, from what is shown here. Going to be buying this one.
3
Joan Didion, Janet Malcom, and Renata Adler are all brilliant essayists. In my view, Adler is the most perceptive, but all three have insightful, careful minds worth engaging with.
1
Thanks for this review. I will hasten to buy and read "Nobody's Looking at you," right after I finish rereading "Anna Karenina," which has in a timely fashion risen to the top of my stack of books to reread.
2
Just read In the Freud Archives. Inspired a project of mine.
2
@Zappo
With the quotes that were made up? I don't think so. I lost all respect for Malcolm after that.
2
@Zappo. Such a delightful book- and she explains the quote silliness in the afterword. I am not sure why anyone would believe Masson over Malcolm.
1
To associate Malcolm with journalism is error. Her characterization of journalists has no element of the non-judgment that craft requires: “Every journalist who is not too stupid or too full of himself to notice what is going on knows that what he does is morally indefensible. He is a kind of confidence man, preying on people’s vanity, ignorance or loneliness, gaining their trust and betraying them without remorse.”
Still, she was brilliant in her early and, I think, best work, Psychoanalysis the Impossible Profession, where she defined transference as "the way we all invent each other according to early blueprints."
She writes well. Provokes well. But non-fiction is no definition of journalism.
6
@PK She writes about subjects whom she has interviewed, followed around, asked others about, researched. Since when is that not journalism?
5