©UFS
Here’s another installment of Peanuts that I think relates nicely to all of the recent discussion about Charles M. Schulz.
©UFS
Here’s another installment of Peanuts that I think relates nicely to all of the recent discussion about Charles M. Schulz.
Comments are closed.
Today we know plenty about the flaws of Washington and Jefferson and Adams. Does it add appreciably to our understanding of how America came into being? No. But with a couple of hundred years and many other biographies behind us, there’s no harm to be done.
Rheta Grimsley Johnson’s book “Good Grief: The Story of Charles M. Schulz” is as close to an autobiography as there will ever be. Having the first posthumous biography of your father dwell on an aspect of his personality that he himself brought to light in Rheta’s book — and gave as much attention as it deserved — is a shame.
(Until recently there were numerous used copies of “Good Grief!” on Amazon.com, but now there’s only one, and the asking price is $45.)
Dad did read biographies and enjoyed them now and then, but I’m not sure he would argue for how accurately any biography portrays someone’s life. If you can argue that each of us is fairly unknowable to even those closest to us, how can any biographer hope to glean more than a glimpse of his or her subject’s inner life and true character, if there even is such a thing?