Jean-Jacques Goldman is known as a discreet man. If he has been in the spotlight for many years, he is also the one who always kept his personal life in the shadows. Despite an eclipse that has lasted for 20 years, the “French people’s favorite personality” is skeptical about the publication of a biography about him.
Updated at 7:15am yesterday.
Last August, Éditions du Seuil published “Goldman,” a work that marked a literary return to France. It was Ivan Jablonka, professor of history at the Sorbonne Paris Nord, who was entrusted with the task of tracing the journey of the man at the origin of an innumerable number of successes such as “I walk alone, Therelow, Life by proxy, to our failed ones Deeds, Know that I, without counting those he created for others, including Céline Dion (So that you still love me, I will go where you go, The last will be the first, etc.).
I have read this book in the last few days. My observation: The biographer has done an exemplary job. The work is not in the least sensationalistic and paints a comprehensive and detailed portrait of this high-profile artist.
The author sticks primarily to Goldman’s career as an artist. He rarely discusses his personal life, except to talk about his half-brother Pierre, a far-left activist who was accused of murdering two pharmacists (of which he was acquitted) before being murdered in 1979 at the age of 35. These facts are well known.
I enjoyed it from start to finish. However, one thing that really annoyed me was the way Jablonka integrated himself into the story. The use of “I” seems inappropriate between two paragraphs. Following the trend of documentaries in which the protagonists portray themselves, here follows the trend of biographers who get involved in the story.
Jean-Jacques Goldman refused to cooperate and speak with Jablonka. It is his highest right. The biographer therefore relied on tons of interviews that the singer gave throughout his career and which still exist today thanks to the archives.
Jablonka has done a real monk’s job in this regard!
But the man who has sold 30 million records doesn’t want an author to take over his life and write it into a book without his consent. In an interview with Le Canard Chainé, Jean-Jacques Goldman said: “I have never met this author, neither have my friends, and I am sad for all the people who are tricked into buying these books that talk about me. “ »
Here too, it is his right to distance himself from this book. The problem, however, is that at no point do we get the impression that Jablonka was trying to fool readers into thinking he worked with Goldman. It is clear that his actions were carried out single-handedly. All sources consulted and used appear at the end of the book.
We are a long way from Laurence Catinot-Crost, author of the new biography of Céline Dion entitled “Dis-moi Céline”, who told the French media that she had been talking to the singer for several months when this was false.
All this brings us to the famous question: Does an author have the right to narrate the life of a personality without his consent? To that I answer yes without hesitation.
After that, it’s about professionalism, accuracy, talent, honesty and love. In Jablonka’s case, there is no doubt that he has boundless admiration for what he refers to as “the Arc de Triomphe.”
If the book is full of falsehoods or is defamatory, that is another matter. The publisher and the author are responsible.
After publishing four biographical works, I have wondered a lot about the role and relevance of those who engage in such an exercise. I have come to the conclusion that the level of awareness of the responsibility that imposes on us must take precedence. At every stage of this long and dangerous work the biographer must remember this.
He has the wealth of a lifetime in his hands, he must take care of it.
I have often been asked how I can best get closer to the “truth”. An autobiography? A biography with the collaboration of the artist? A biography without his collaboration? None of the above !
As a huge fan of the genre, I have read some brilliant autobiographies and others that were just facades. I have also read biographies made without the “biographed” person that were riveting, and others that benefited from the artist’s collaboration and reeked of mystification.
The best example of this is Coco Chanel. Three or four biographers abandoned their project after their meeting with the famous seamstress. They realized that she was talking to them about a childhood that she had completely made up.
I understand the frustration of people whose lives are filtered through a third party they don’t know. They feel like they are missing something and that the story they are reading has nothing to do with the events they experienced. It’s normal that this look (even if it has changed over time) belongs only to us.
But a biography is primarily the perspective of the person writing it. Otherwise we rely on ChatGPT.
A biographer is an investigator, a journalist, a historian and a director. Although he multiplies the sources and tries to make the work as “objective” as possible, the portrait that results from his approach is painted with his eye.
Writing a biography is like a treasure hunt. We don’t know what we will discover. What really matters is the joy the researcher will feel when exhuming the chest.
Goldman
threshold
400 pages