[.ca] Penguin Classics Life Of Samuel Johnson (ISBN 0140431160)

From Amazon.com:
James Boswell is for some the ideal scribe, for others a sycophantic toady. Edmund Wilson memorably labeled him "a vain and pushing diarist." Boswell can even be seen as someone unconsciously intent on undermining his idol in sonorous, balanced sentences. Early on in his massive Life, he puts all manner of ideas into our heads with his boobish attempts to clear the youthful Johnson of potential impropriety: "His juvenile attachments to the fair sex were, however, very transient; and it is certain that he formed no criminal connection whatsoever." And while it's often tempting to ignore Boswell's more personal intrusions and delight solely in the melancholic master's words and deeds, there are delightful admissions as, "I was at this time so occupied, shall I call it? or so dissipated, by the amusements of London that our next meeting was not till Saturday, June 25..." Samuel Johnson was born in 1709 and died in 1784--a long life, though one marred by depression and fear of death. On April 20, 1764, for example, he declared, "I would consent to have a limb amputated to recover my spirits." Many of the quotes Boswell includes are a sort of greatest hits: Johnson's definitions of oats and lexicographer, his love for his cat Hodge, as well as thousands of bon, and mal, mots. ("Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel"; "Sir, a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hinder legs. It is not done well; but you are surprized to find it done at all.") But there are also many unfamiliar pleasures--Boswell's accounts of Johnson's literary industry, including the Dictionary, The Rambler and Lives of the Poets; Johnson's singular loathing for Scotland and France; and the surprising hints of revelry. Awakened at 3 AM by friends, he greets them with, "What, is it you, you dogs! I'll have a frisk with you." This at age 42. Johnson's final years were marked by pain and loneliness but certainly no loss of wit.

nice but heavily abridged:
I liked this but prefer the unabridged edition published by Oxford University Press (in their Oxford World's Classics series). If you're willing to read Boswell, spend a few dollars more for the OUP edition.

Would have enjoyed a cohesive narrative more:
I picked up this book after reading that it's style of recording a subject verbatim was mimicked by Lillian Ross in her famous "The New Yorker" magazine article on Ernest Hemingway. Following Ernest Hemingway around with a pad and pencil in hand she simply copied everything that he said over a period of days. James Boswell used the same approach when he recorded the "Life of Samuel Johnson". I had always thought of Dr. Samuel Johnson as being the most important literary critic from the 18th century. At least that is what Harold Bloom, the Yale literary critic, said. So I was disappointed that Boswell's "Life of Johnson" did not talk too much about literature. Rather Boswell takes us along as Johnson drinks "copious amounts of wine" and makes fun of the Scotch, the Irish, women, and certain facets of marriage. This dialogue is entertaining usually. But when Johnson supports the British class system and attacks the American patriots (this was 1776 after all) I found it annoying. Boswell mentions Johnson's literature but does not delve into it. He spent some pages talking about Johnson's dictionary that he wrote with the help of two editorial assistants. (That was quite a feat if you consider that the French dictionnaire of the same period was put together by a team of scholars.) I would have enjoyed it more if Johnson or Boswell had talked about Boswell's book on Shakespeare, for example. He only mentions these books as the events surrounding their publication or the King's interest in them intersect with Johnson's life. As other reviewers have pointed out this book is not a biography. Rather is in a amalagamation of Johnson's visits to his friends and a dialogue of what he said there. Boswell's sayings are often quoted and those recorded here are sometimes quite famous or funny. Famous: "One may lead a horse to the water, but twenty cannot make him drink." Funny: "I'll come no more behind your scenes, David; for the silk stockings and white bosoms of your actresses excite my amorous propensities". My one criticism of this book is how it hops from one vignette to another with no continuity between the scenes. It is a copendium of tales rather than a lengthy dialogue. That might be why one reviewer said you could dive into it at random and find something worthwhile at every page.

In retrospect, it depends on what you want out of this.:
Almost two years ago, I gave this five stars. On reading much more about Boswell and his procedures, I have to qualify my earlier review. If you want a book about Johnson that tells how one man saw him, then yes, it still merits five stars. If you want a full perspective of Johnson - - as the word biography would imply, I'd downgrade it to three stars. So on balance, four. There are of course many positives, or I wouldn't have given it 5 stars two years ago. Boswell had a strong talent for recording Johnson's conversations, and they are wonderful. Some of them are down right hilarious! Boswell was also a bit of a dramatist, setting up situations such as Johnson's meeting with Wilkes, placing bets over whether he would challenge Johnson on his habit of hiding orange peels. And Boswell could tell a story very dramatically - - it's his dramatic skills and memory which have been the basis on which his champions have defended him. However, as a 'biography' this leaves much to be desired. Not just the issue of scope, with some 80% of the pages being on 20 years of Johnson's life. Boswell just wasn't a biographer, his story is too personal, he inadequately integrates important opinions, and he suppresses important information that's inconsistent with his rather simple view of Johnson. As Richard Schwartz has excellently pointed out, Boswell has presented us with an unshaped series of details, where data do not converge to a whole, and remain undigested. Inaccuracies: Boswell tells us early on that he sometimes scurried across London to verify a date, but he apparently wouldn't consult a perpetual calendar; there are a number of occasions where his dates don't align with the day of week, yet his certainty in dating events make it all sound so true. And there is the famous blooper of his putting Johnson at Oxford for three years, rather than one. The inaccuracies would not be such an issue were it not for the fact that Boswell positions himself as being definitive, and condemns the efforts of John Hawkins and Hester Thrale as being inaccurate. Both of them saw aspects of Johnson whihc Boswell never had the depth to see and understand. Repositioning: Boswell the story teller shaped events... There is an important event where Johnson meets the King in the King's library. Boswell makes it sound as if the King was completely focused on Johnson, and no one else was there - - as if it was a private audience (yet it certainly wasn't). To read this book, you would think that Boswell was one of the most important people in Johnson's life; while Boswell certainly mattered to Johnson, there are very few descriptions of Johnson's life without Boswell, as if Johnson were more dependent on Boswell than the reverse. But the total number of days they were together was a very small fraction of Johnson's life. Suppression of details: Boswell is so intent on describing Johnson's devotion to his departed wife, that he never tells us that Johnson had hoped to remarry, or that later in life he made advances to a memebr of his household. Boswell also won't relay lifelong friend Edmund Hector's concern that at one point Johnson was so depressed that Hector feared it might shorten his life. These details don't fit Boswell's simple view of Johnson - - and when someone like Anna Seward would send him anecdotes with a disturbing tone, Boswell wrote it off to "prejudice." We also know now that Hawkins, who knew Johnson long before Boswell, wrote a bio of Johnson that has been unfairly eclipsed, largely because of Boswell's treatment and Boswell's unquestioned authority. Even for the years that Boswell -did- know Johnson, his record is far from complete. Johnson recovered from one major period of depression by being immersed in family life with the Thrales, yet Boswell never spent much time at their household, and so never really saw that 'family' side of Johnson. Should you avoid this like the plague? No, not at all. But the full unabridged edition represents quite a commitment, and you might be better off reading the abridged version, and spending the time saved by reading Bate's biogrpahy, or even Johnson's own writings. (In writing this review, I've been very influenced by various books & articles by Donald Greene & Richard Schwartz; I've also tried to be sensitive to the defenses of such Boswell defenders as Frederick Pottle.)

Biography as English literature.:
Typically, I have a bias against abridged editions of literary works. Nevertheless, prudent editing and abridgement enhances the casual reader's appreciation of this literary tome. Undergraduates working a required reading list for English Lit classes are on their own. Anyway, Samuel Johnson was a noted author and editor of the 18th century English literary scene. Instead of an exhaustive study of Johnson's life as author and editor, biographer Boswell compiled a series of anecdotes, quotations, and correspondence that is held together by his friendship with Johnson. Boswell's purpose was to capture the essence of the man. Johnson was adept at articulating pithy remarks with surgical precision. For example, "...a woman's preaching is like a dog's walking on his hinder legs. It is not done well; but you are surprized to find it done at all." The 18th century spellings, etc. remain intact. We have Johnson to thank for the familiar "...hell is paved with good intentions," and "Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel." Boswell takes care to portray Johnson as sexually moral. After the death of his wife, Johnson (according to Boswell) was apparently celibate. Johnson rebuffed "women of the town," and said he wasn't interested in their carnal delights. Johnson told David Garrick, the actor, that he would not go backstage at the theater because "the white bubbies and silk stockings of your Actresses excite my genitals." As an interesting aside, the editor's introduction speculates that Johnson's relationship with the widow Thrale may have been sexual, with bondage overtones. Who knows? The description of London coffeehouses, theaters, and gathering places are heavy with 18th century atmosphere. Bottom line, reading this book is interesting as a curiosity. Its relevance for 21st century readers may seem limited, but don't let that stop you from sampling the fare. ;-)

Abridged Version:
This is an abridged version. If you want an unabridged version, get the Life of Johnson (Oxford World's Classics) \oUNABRIDGED.