To compound my silliness displayed below, it turns out I was not responding
to something William wrote, but, rather to something Chris that William was
quoting. Answering forum stuff during coffee-breaks from wrestling with
lawyers,
accountants, and brokers is not a good idea.

William writes:


> BTW - I  enjoyed Cheerkep's back-handed compliment:  "Richardson deserves
> to
> be proud of what he's done in service of Picasso's reputation" -- as if
that
> reputation could have been enhanced one, teeny bit.
>
>
William catches me in my failure to appreciate the ambiguity of my line. I
did not have in mind RAISING Picasso's reputation in the eyes of the already
well-informed, but, rather, helping to SPREAD it and to fill in details. These
are among the "services" a good biography usually provides to its subject's
reputation. And over time it can even help preserve a subject's place in the
sun. 
I have many times had my eye caught by a praising review of the biography of
a writer whose work I'd hardly tasted. After reading the bio, I then went on
to read an expanse of the writer's work. I'm sure there's been a good deal of
added attention by "laymen" to Picasso's work because of Richardson.



**************
Worried about job security? Check out the 5 safest jobs in a
recession.
(http://jobs.aol.com/gallery/growing-job-industries?ncid=emlcntuscare00000003
)

Reply via email to