You are here:   Civilisation >  Books > Mart's Art is Not Just Smart
 

So there is real meat here, but everywhere the veneration intrudes. Throughout the book the swell of eulogy grows into a wave that breaks in the last chapter, in which Bradford drowns in his own hyperbole. Yes, Amis is superior to Barnes and McEwan (is that saying so much?), but superior to Nabokov, as he at one point claims? Wonderful as it is, is Money up there with James Joyce and Ulysses? And is the (admittedly over-derided) Yellow Dog in fact a "brilliantly orchestrated" masterpiece? 

Bradford's book is an opportunity lost. Here we have that rare thing, a modern British author able at his best to match up to some of the American giants, but his biographer spoils it by cosy excess, unable it seems to contemplate the possibility that his subject is not always at the top of his form. The result is another example of the wearisome boosterism that has come to characterise so much of British culture. With a PR smoothichops leading the country and a circus barker as Mayor of London, must we go in for unseemly puffery in the arts as well? More selective praise would have helped cut the ground from under Amis's purblind or rancorous detractors. 

The best critical passages are a reminder of the man's quality, so much greater than his father's, and of the seriousness beneath the humour. In this regard, more could have been said about Amis's The War Against Cliché and his prowess as a critic. Recently reviewing Public Enemies, the exchange of letters between Bernard-Henri Lévy and Michel Houellebecq, I found myself casting around for a pair of British essayists who could pull off a similar performance: only an Amis/Hitchens correspondence occurred to me. And on the subject of what Amis might have written, the great mystery is why he has never taken on the pop industry. Don DeLillo had a go in Great Jones Street, with his Bucky Wunderlick character, and Salman Rushdie with his rather cloying The Ground Beneath Her Feet, but with his lack of deference to the rock world and feeling for gargantuan pretence, Amis would be the natural man to do it.

In a literary market that has become toppy and frothy, as the City boys say when shares soar above their underpinnings, and in need of a correction, how does the Amis oeuvre look when set against his frequently bloated rivals? Let's take the simplest measure. People will be reading this work in 50 years' time, it is routinely and dubiously maintained of many an ephemeral Booker laureate. With the best of Amis junior, the prize's most distinguished non-recipient, they really will.

View Full Article
 
Share/Save
 
 
 
 
otistic
February 17th, 2012
4:02 AM
Amis is annoying to read because his ruling passion is to pound his readers about the head with tedious examples of how clever he can be. With his "...if you're reading this sentence in a thousand years..." which can be found about a third of the way into that long slog he so misleadingly called The Information, he boldly admitted to having an insanely high opinion of himself. I took that as a cry for help, felt really sorry for the guy, then stopped reading.

grahamf
February 15th, 2012
8:02 PM
A well-judged review. Much of the critical sniping at Amis is surely envy: you might have made the point that, above all, Amis is the paramount English stylist of his generation, by some distance, and for the pretenders, that's the talent that really hurts. As for the books as a whole, they are distinctly hit and miss, but in Money he produced the definitive British novel of the past 50 years, and the one book that we can sure will endure. My son, who reads almost no fiction, read the whole of Money in two days when he was 18. That, for me, pretty much sewed up the case for the defence.

Jim Lincoln
February 14th, 2012
9:02 AM
Alas, I remember Amis's maundering contribution to the nuclear disarmament debate. Not to mention his Stalin-was-a-very-bad-man book. 'The American giants'? Who they?

Anonymous
February 14th, 2012
6:02 AM
And what the Hell is "a kind of no-garden of a novel"?

JackTres
February 14th, 2012
2:02 AM
Yes, what does "smoothichops" mean? What a potentially useful word.

AnonymousCharley B
February 11th, 2012
11:02 PM
forgive my susceptibility to stereotyping, but in what other society in the history of the world would a person be criticized for getting his/her teeth fixed, Sheeeesh! In the end, Mr. Walden tells us more about himself than either his subject or his subject's subject. Zzzzzz

Lee Ronstadt
February 11th, 2012
2:02 PM
What does "smoothiechops" mean? Couldn't find it in any dictionary, including slang.

Post your comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.