-36% $10.24$10.24
FREE delivery May 17 - 20
Ships from: YourOnlineBookstore Sold by: YourOnlineBookstore
$7.45$7.45
Ships from: Amazon Sold by: tLighthouse Books
Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.
Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.
OK
The Biographer's Tale: A Novel Paperback – December 1, 2001
Purchase options and add-ons
“Elegant ... witty ... intelligent.” —The Washington Post
Here is the story of Phineas G. Nanson, a disenchanted graduate student who decides to escape the world of postmodern literary theory and immerse himself in the messiness of “real life” by writing a biography of a great biographer. In a series of adventures that are by turns intellectual and comic, scientific and sensual, Phineas tracks his subject to the deserts of Africa and the maelstrom of the Arctic. Along the way he comes to rely on two women, one of whom may be the guide he needs out of the dizzying labyrinth of his research and back into his own life. A tantalizing yarn of detection and desire, The Biographer’s Tale is a provocative look at “truth” in biography and our perennial quest for certainty.
- Print length320 pages
- LanguageEnglish
- PublisherVintage
- Publication dateDecember 1, 2001
- Dimensions5.24 x 0.71 x 7.95 inches
- ISBN-100375725083
- ISBN-13978-0375725081
The Amazon Book Review
Book recommendations, author interviews, editors' picks, and more. Read it now.
Frequently bought together
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
Editorial Reviews
Review
“A tenderly funny novel. . . .One of Byatt’s most exuberant books.” —The Baltimore Sun
“Wise, sharp-witted. . . . miss it at your peril.” —St. Louis Post-Dispatch
“An impressive achievement, a literary mosaic at once exotic, academic, esoteric, engaging, and disconcerting. . . . A feast for the brain” —The Denver Post
“One of Byatt’s most exuberant books.” —The Baltimore Sun
From the Inside Flap
Here is the story of Phineas G. Nanson, a disenchanted graduate student who decides to escape the world of postmodern literary theory and immerse himself in the messiness of ?real life? by writing a biography of a great biographer. In a series of adventures that are by turns intellectual and comic, scientific and sensual, Phineas tracks his subject to the deserts of Africa and the maelstrom of the Arctic. Along the way he comes to rely on two women, one of whom may be the guide he needs out of the dizzying labyrinth of his research and back into his own life. A tantalizing yarn of detection and desire, The Biographer?s Tale is a provocative look at ?truth? in biography and our perennial quest for certainty.
From the Back Cover
Here is the story of Phineas G. Nanson, a disenchanted graduate student who decides to escape the world of postmodern literary theory and immerse himself in the messiness of "real life" by writing a biography of a great biographer. In a series of adventures that are by turns intellectual and comic, scientific and sensual, Phineas tracks his subject to the deserts of Africa and the maelstrom of the Arctic. Along the way he comes to rely on two women, one of whom may be the guide he needs out of the dizzying labyrinth of his research and back into his own life. A tantalizing yarn of detection and desire, The Biographer's Tale is a provocative look at "truth" in biography and our perennial quest for certainty.
About the Author
Excerpt. © Reprinted by permission. All rights reserved.
I made my decision, abruptly, in the middle of one of Gareth Butcher's famous theoretical seminars. He was quoting Empedocles, in his plangent, airy voice. "Here sprang up many faces without necks, arms wandered without shoulders, unattached, and eyes strayed alone, in need of foreheads." He frequently quoted Empedocles, usually this passage. We were discussing, not for the first time, Lacan's theory of morcellement, the dismemberment of the imagined body. There were twelve postgraduates, including myself, and Professor Ormerod Goode. It was a sunny day and the windows were very dirty. I was looking at the windows, and I thought, I'm not going to go on with this anymore. Just like that. It was May 8th 1994. I know that, because my mother had been buried the week before, and I'd missed the seminar on Frankenstein.
I don't think my mother's death had anything to do with my decision, though as I set it down, I see it might be construed that way. It's odd that I can't remember what text we were supposed to be studying on that last day. We'd been doing a lot of not-too-long texts written by women. And also quite a lot of Freud-we'd deconstructed the Wolf Man, and Dora. The fact that I can't remember, though a little humiliating, is symptomatic of the "reasons" for my abrupt decision. All the seminars, in fact, had a fatal family likeness. They were repetitive in the extreme. We found the same clefts and crevices, transgressions and disintegrations, lures and deceptions beneath, no matter what surface we were scrying. I thought, next we will go on to the phantasmagoria of Bosch, and, in his incantatory way, Butcher obliged. I went on looking at the filthy window above his head, and I thought, I must have things. I know a dirty window is an ancient, well-worn trope for intellectual dissatisfaction and scholarly blindness. The thing is, that the thing was also there. A real, very dirty window, shutting out the sun. A thing.
I was sitting next to Ormerod Goode. Ormerod Goode and Gareth Butcher were joint Heads of Department that year, and Goode, for reasons never made explicit, made it his business to be present at Butcher's seminars. This attention was not reciprocated, possibly because Goode was an Anglo-Saxon and Ancient Norse expert, specialising in place-names. Gareth Butcher did not like dead languages, and was not proficient in living ones. He read his Foucault and Lacan in translation, like his Heraclitus and his Empedocles. Ormerod Goode contributed little to the seminars, beyond corrections of factual inaccuracies, which he noticed even when he appeared to be asleep. No one cared much for these interventions. Inaccuracies can be subsumed as an inevitable part of postmodern uncertainty, or play, one or the other or both.
I liked sitting next to Goode-most of the other students didn't-because he made inscrutable notes in ancient runes. Also he drew elaborate patterns of carved, interlaced plants and creatures-Celtic, Viking, I didn't know-occasionally improper or obscene, always intricate. I liked the runes because I have always liked codes and secret languages, and more simply, because I grew up on Tolkien. I suppose, if the truth were told, I should have to confess that I ended up as a postgraduate student of literature because of an infantile obsession with Gandalf's Middle Earth. I did like poetry too, and I did-in self-defence-always know Tolkien's poems weren't the real thing. I remember discovering T. S. Eliot. And then Donne and Marvell. Long ago and far away. I don't know, to this day, if Ormerod Goode loved or despised Tolkien. Tolkien's people are sexless and Goode's precisely shadowed graffiti were anything but. Plaisir, consommation, jouissance. Glee. He was-no doubt still is-a monumentally larger man. He has a round bald cranium, round gold glasses round round, darkly brown eyes, a round, soft mouth, several chins, a round belly carried comfortably on pillars of legs between columnar arms. I think of him, always, as orotund Ormerod Goode, adding more Os to his plethora, and a nice complex synaesthetic metaphor-an accurate one-to my idea of him. Anyway, there I was, next to him, when I made my decision, and when I took my eyes away from the dirty glass there was his BB pencil, hovering lazily, tracing a figleaf, a vine, a thigh, hair, fingers, round shiny fruit.
I found myself walking away beside him, down the corridor, when it was over. I felt a need to confirm my decision by telling someone about it. He walked with a rapid sailing motion, lightly for such a big man. I had almost to run to keep up with him. I should perhaps say, now, that I am a very small man. "Small but perfectly formed" my father would say, several times a day, before his disappearance. He himself was not much bigger. The family name is Nanson; my full name is Phineas Gilbert Nanson-I sign myself always Phineas G. Nanson. When I discovered-in a Latin class when I was thirteen-that nanus was the Latin for dwarf, cognate with the French nain, I felt a frisson of excited recognition. I was a little person, the child of a little person, I had a name in a system, Nanson. I have never felt anything other than pleasure in my small, delicate frame. Its only disadvantage is the number of cushions I need to see over the dashboard when driving. I am adept and nimble on ladders. But keeping up with Ormerod Goode's lazy pace was a problem. I said, into his wake, "I have just made an important decision."
He stopped. His moon-face considered mine, thoughtfully.
"I have decided to give it all up. I've decided I don't want to be a postmodern literary theorist."
"We should drink to that," said Ormerod Goode. "Come into my office."
His office, like the rest of our run-down department, had dirty windows, and a dusty, no-coloured carpet. It also had two high green leather wing-chairs, a mahogany desk and a tray of spotless glasses which he must have washed himself. He produced a bottle of malt whisky from a bookcase. He poured us each a generous glass, and enquired what had led to this decision, and was it as sudden as it appeared. I replied that it had seemed sudden, at least had surprised me, but that it appeared to be quite firm. "You may be wise," said Ormerod Goode. "Since it was a bolt from the blue, I take it you have no ideas about what you will do with the open life that now lies before you?"
I wondered whether to tell him about the dirty window. I said, "I felt an urgent need for a life full of things." I was pleased with the safe, solid Anglo-Saxon word. I had avoided the trap of talking about "reality" and "unreality" for I knew very well that postmodernist literary theory could be described as a reality. People lived in it. I did, however, fatally, add the Latin-derived word, less exact, redundant even, to my precise one. "I need a life full of things," I said. "Full of facts."
"Facts," said Ormerod Goode. "Facts." He meditated. "The richness," he said, "the surprise, the shining solidity of a world full of facts. Every established fact-taking its place in
a constellation of glittering facts like planets in an empty heaven, declaring here is matter, and there is vacancy-every established fact illuminates the world. True scholarship once aspired to add its modest light to that illumination. To clear a few cobwebs. No more."
His round eyes glowed behind his round lenses. I found myself counting the Os in his pronouncements, as though they were coded clues to a new amplitude. The Glenmorangie slid like smooth flame down my throat. I said that a long time ago I had been in love with poetry, but that now I needed things, facts. "Verbum caro factum est," said Ormerod Goode opaquely. "The art of biography is a despised art because it is an art of things, of facts, of arranged facts. By far the greatest work of scholarship in my time, to my knowledge, is Scholes Destry-Scholes's biographical study of Sir Elmer Bole. But nobody knows it. It is not considered. And yet, the ingenuity, the passion."
I remarked, perhaps brashly, that I had always considered biography a bastard form, a dilettante pursuit. Tales told by those incapable of true invention, simple stories for those incapable of true critical insight. Distractions constructed by amateurs for lady readers who would never grapple with The Waves or The Years but liked to feel they had an intimate acquaintance with the Woolfs and with Bloomsbury, from daring talk of semen on skirts to sordid sexual interference with nervous girls. A gossipy form, I said to Ormerod Goode, encouraged by Glenmorangie and nervous emptiness of spirit. There was some truth in that view, he conceded, rising smoothly from his wing-chair and strolling over to his bookcase. But I should consider, said Ormerod Goode, two things.
Gossip, on the one hand, is an essential part of human communication, not to be ignored. And on the other, a great biography is a noble thing. Consider, he said, the fact that no human individual resembles another. We are not clones, we are not haplodiploid beings. From egg to eventual decay, each of us is unique. What can be nobler, he reiterated, or more exacting, than to explore, to constitute, to open, a whole man, a whole opus, to us? What resources-scientific, intellectual, psychological, historical, linguistic and geographic-does a man-or a woman-not need, who would hope to do justice to such a task? I know, I know, he said, that most biographies are arid or sugary parodies of what is wanted. And the true masterpiece-such as Destry-Scholes's magnum opus-is not always recognised when it is made, for biographical readers have taste corrupted both by gossip and by too much literary or political ideology. Now you are about to reconstitute yourself, he said, to move off towards a vita nuova you could do worse than devote a day or two to these volumes.
I was somewhat distracted by counting the Os-which included the oo sounds represented by Us-in Ormerod Goode's words. In the late afternoon gloom he was like some demonic owl hooting de profundis. The sonorous Os were a code, somehow, for something truly portentous. I shook myself. I was more than a little slewed.
So I nodded solemnly, and accepted the loan of the three volumes, still in their original paper wrappers, protected by transparent film. They filled the next two or three giddy days when, having decided what I was not going to do and be, I had to make a new life.
Volume i, A Singular Youth, had a frequently reproduced print of a view of King's College, Cambridge, on the cover.
Volume ii, The Voyager, had a rather faded old photograph of the Bosphorus.
Volume iii, Vicarage and Harem, had a brown picture of some stiff little children throwing and catching a ball under some gnarled old apple trees.
It was all very uninspiring. It was like a publishing version of the neighbour who insists on showing you his holiday snaps, splashes of water long smoothed out, ice-creams long digested and excreted. I flicked through the pages of old photographs reproduced in little clutches in the middle of each book. Scholes Destry-Scholes had been sparing with visual aids, or maybe they had not been considered important in the late 1950s and early '60s. There was a photograph of Sir Prosper Bole, MP, looking like God the Father, and one of the three buttoned-up and staring Beeching sisters with scraped-back hair-"Fanny is on the right." I assumed Fanny was Bole's mother. There was a very bad drawing of a youth at Cambridge, resting his head on his hand. "Elmer (Em) drawn by Johnny Hawthorne during their Lakeland jaunt." There was a map of Somaliland and a map of the Silk Road, and a picture of a ship ("The trusty Hippolyta") listing dangerously. Volume ii had a lot more maps-Turkey, Russia, the Crimea-a cliché of the Charge of the Light Brigade, another of the Covered Bazaar in Constantinople, a photograph of a bust of Florence Nightingale, a ridiculous picture of Lord and Lady Stratford de Redcliffe in fancy dress as Queen Anne grandees receiving Sultan Abdulmecid, and what I took to be Sir Elmer's wedding photographs. He appeared, in a grainy way, to have been darkly handsome, very whiskered, tall and unbending. His wife, who also appeared in a miniature silhouette, in an oval frame ("Miss Evangeline Solway at seventeen years of age"), appeared to have a sweet small face and a diminutive frame. Volume iii was even less rewarding. There were a lot of photographs of frontispieces of Victorian books, of poetry and fairy stories. A lot more maps, vicarage snapshots and more conventional views of the Bosphorus. They all had that brownish, faded look. I looked on the back flap, then, for information about the author himself. I think most readers do this, get their bearings visually before starting on the real work. I know a man who wrote a dissertation on authors' photos on the back of novels, literary and popular. There was no photograph of Scholes Destry-Scholes. The biographical note was minimal.
Scholes Destry-Scholes was born in Pontefract, Yorkshire, in 1925. He is working on further volumes of this Life.
Volumes ii and iii added critical encomia for the previous volumes to this meagre description.
And so I began reading, in a mood at once a grey-brown smoky penumbra, induced by the illustrations, and full of jagged shafts of bright lightning on purplish vacancy, induced by my own uncertain future. Odd lines of Scholes's description of Bole's life have become for me needle-like mnemonics, recalling alternate pure elation and pure panic, purely my own, as Bole prepares to fail his Little Go, or sneaks out to stow away on a vessel bound for the Horn of Africa. Most of these mnemonics are associated with Volume i. For it has to be said that as I progressed, the reading became compulsive, the mental dominance of both Bole and Destry-Scholes more and more complete. I do not pretend to have discovered even a quarter of the riches of that great book on that first gulping and greedy reading. Destry-Scholes had, among all the others, the primitive virtue of telling a rattling good yarn, and I was hooked. And he had that other primitive virtue, the capacity to make up a world in every corner of which his reader would wish to linger, to look, to learn.
Product details
- Publisher : Vintage; Reprint edition (December 1, 2001)
- Language : English
- Paperback : 320 pages
- ISBN-10 : 0375725083
- ISBN-13 : 978-0375725081
- Item Weight : 9.6 ounces
- Dimensions : 5.24 x 0.71 x 7.95 inches
- Best Sellers Rank: #1,100,305 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
- #11,738 in Contemporary Literature & Fiction
- #37,985 in Teen & Young Adult Literature & Fiction
- #48,689 in Literary Fiction (Books)
- Customer Reviews:
About the author
Discover more of the author’s books, see similar authors, read author blogs and more
Customer reviews
Customer Reviews, including Product Star Ratings help customers to learn more about the product and decide whether it is the right product for them.
To calculate the overall star rating and percentage breakdown by star, we don’t use a simple average. Instead, our system considers things like how recent a review is and if the reviewer bought the item on Amazon. It also analyzed reviews to verify trustworthiness.
Learn more how customers reviews work on Amazon-
Top reviews
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
Phineas goes to Pontefract to see where Scholes was brought up. A disappointing experience, since he really learns nothing about Scholes the man, and staring at his house all day just makes the woman who lives there think that he's a stalker. But then someone finally replies to Phineas's ad in the TLS, and he has a bit more luck tracking down correspondence between Scholes and his publisher. Three documents are brought to light, and a chest full of Scholes' things (including underwear and marbles), are opened for Phineas's inspection. The three documents are biographical accounts of Linnaeus, Sir Francis Galton, and Henrik Ibsen. Did Scholes's supposed death in the Maelstrom interrupt these projects? On his quest, Phineas meets two very beautiful, but very different women: Fulla, the Bee taxonomist, and Vera, the radiographer. Whilst working in Puck's Girdle, a literary travel agency, Phineas also meets a dragon in the form of Maurice Bossey...
I wasn't sure of The Biographer's Tale at first. I thought that it was a very good account of the life of the researcher, all those coincidences which seem to gather to compose an answer. All those jigsaw pieces which you and you alone can put together. The Biographer's Tale is such a learned piece that it is quite daunting. There are a huge variety of references to names and places which aren't crucial to the plot, they're just part of the vista. For me, this was difficult at first, since I like to look everything up. I had to adapt, to just investigate things that I really didn't know anything about, and to ignore those references that I recognised. In short, you do need a researcher's skill to get something from this novel, to know where to look. Scholes's card index system will be very familiar to most researchers. However, I think that you have to be engrossed by the actual subjects in order to put all the pieces together. Someone else's research is never as stimulating as your own. Having said that, Linnaeus, Galton, and Ibsen are very interesting subjects, so it's worthwhile doing some background reading. There were also aspects of the plot that I was unhappy with. From being almost an asexual man, Phineas has not one, but two lovely ladies thrust upon him - or maybe that's just my jealousy. There's also that dreadful scene where Phineas waves a penknife around in Puck's Girdle with hysterical abandon, although Fulla valiantly rescues him. Or maybe Phineas has been afflicted by 'The Feminization of Nature', that admirable treatise put forward by Deborah Cadbury.
A. S. Byatt's own research is impeccable. There really is a dearth of bee taxonomists in the world, as Fulla states, and the Stag Beetle is very much in danger of extinction. I delighted in reading up on the alkali bees and the pollination of Alfalfa. It's also great to read what abominable snowman lies behind Linnaeus's homo nocturnes idea, and it's true that the great taxonomist thought swallows spent their winter under sea. Galton really did push Nangoro's niece out of his tent in Ovampo, in the fear that she would ruin his white linen garments. The Ibsen fan who wrote 'Brand's Daughters' was Laura Petersen, and she may have been an inspiration for 'A Doll's House'. Phineas seems to think that Galton was not all that well known, but there is a great deal of information out there on the Father of Eugenics. A. S. Byatt seems to have captured the mood of the current times admirably: Galton thought the Australian Aborigines were the lowest form of human life, something which is echoed in the attitudes towards the Tasmanian Aborigines, in Matthew Kneale's admirable 'English Passengers'. Having said that, Galton did believe that Victorian gentlemen were two rungs below the Athenians (but, on the negative side, the Athenians owned slaves). Phineas is much at a loss as to how to compose the story of a man's life, since there are so many ways at looking at man, and at a man. Now the human genome has been mapped, and Galton's genetics is experimented upon in our fields. Fulla believes in the interdepence of life, Vera the radiographer can see cancer weave its web across a patient's body. The Strange Passenger in Ibsen's Peer Gynt asks Peer to donate his body to science; Galton puzzles over what is real and what is imaginary. Given his name, Phineas can't but help be an explorer as well, although not quite in the Jules Verne style of Phileas Fogg. I believe A. S. Byatt chose the rather silly name 'Phineas G. Nanson', because it's very close to 'Phaeogenes nanus', the mite that preys on the beetle that causes Dutch elm disease. Since I haven't found out anything about this small mite, I'm unsure of what relevance it is to Phineas's character. However, just as American hospitals are overwhelmed with people queuing up to have their bodies scanned in 3D, so Phineas finds out a great deal about a person other than Scholes Destry-Scholes.
After the third or fourth reading, and a bit of studying, The Biographer's Tale does emerge as a worthwhile endeavour.
Those interested in the plot and what this book is "about" can read the other reviews, and find that they tell you that there isn't much of a plot here and that the book is about - whatever happens to strike you in this crazy quilt "patchwork" of ideas and literary references.
As a coda, it would be disingenuous of me to say that none of them struck me. Francis Galton - do look up the lengthy entry on him in Wikipedia - is a fascinating character, cousin of Charles Darwin and one of those eccentric Victorian polymaths, hitherto unknown to me. I can see why Byatt was fascinated by him, and much of what did strike a chord with me here came from his insights, one of which, quoted here, is:
"I often feel that the tableland of sanity, on which most of us dwell, is small in area, with unfenced precipices on every side, over any one of which we may fall."
The wonder of the books of the Yorkshire Tetralogy is that they take one as a reader to the dizzying edges of those precipices, such is their power. Whereas here, one is left solidly and stolidly on the tableland, albeit with many a peculiar bauble with which to toy.
The Biographer's Tale follows Phineas G. Nanson from the abstraction of graduate school to the discovery of wonder in the natural world. "...the vision of these very real, chattering birds said to me... that the senses of order and wonder, both, that I had once got from literature, I now found more easily and directly in the creatures." To reach this point near the end of the novel, both Nanson and we readers need to travel through a series of lessening abstractions to the moment when the narrator can put down his pen, renounce writing, and immerse himself into the world that his senses can directly communicate.
Through his quest to become the biographer of Scholes Destry-Scholes, Nanson is faced with the many challenges a writer faces in understanding another human being. With the biographer, we come to understand that neither the taxonomic, psychological, nor artistic approach to understanding life is sufficient. Not even the amalgamated approach, represented by the various discussions of composite biographies or composite photographs, can help the biographer in his quest. Ultimately Nanson comes to believe that we are necessarily constricted by our senses and by our "selves." Biography is impossible; only autobiography is left.
Byatt's work makes an interesting comparison and contrast between art and life. While Nanson does succeed in putting down his pen, Byatt does not -- she finishes the novel, after all. This conundrum of this dichotomy is perhaps best summarized by a line from the novel, when Nanson writes: "Back to what I was writing, which was a renunciation of writing."