Jean-Jacques Goldman is renowned for being a discreet man. If he shone 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 “favorite personality of the French” therefore takes a dim view of the publication of a biography concerning him.
Last August, Éditions du Seuil published Goldman, a work which marks the literary return to France. It was to Ivan Jablonka, professor of history at the Sorbonne Paris Nord, who was entrusted with the task of retracing the journey of the man who is at the origin of an incalculable number of successes such as I walk alone, There, Life by proxy, To our failed actions, Know that Inot counting those he created for others, including Céline Dion (So that you love me again, I will go where you go, The last will be first, etc.).
I read this book over the past few days. My observation: the biographer did an exemplary job. Not a bit sensationalist, the work paints an exhaustive and detailed portrait of this high-level artist.
The author mainly sticks to Goldman’s career as an artist. He rarely enters into his personal life, except to talk about his half-brother Pierre, a far-left activist accused of the murder of two pharmacists (of which he was exonerated) before being assassinated in 1979, at the age 35 years old. These facts are well known.
I enjoyed it from start to finish. However, one thing deeply annoyed me and it was the way Jablonka integrated himself into the story. Between two paragraphs, the use of “I” seems incongruous. After the trend of documentaries where the protagonists portray themselves, here is that of biographers who insert themselves into the story.
Jean-Jacques Goldman refused to collaborate with Jablonka and speak to him. It is his most ultimate right. The biographer therefore relied on tons of interviews that the singer gave during his career and which continue to exist thanks to the archives.
Jablonka did a real monk’s job in this regard!
But the man with 30 million records sold does not want an author to take over his life and put it in a book without his consent. In interview with THE Chained duck, Jean-Jacques Goldman said: “I have never met this author, neither have my friends, and I am sad for all the people who are being duped into buying these books that talk about me. »
Again, it is his right to distance himself from this book. But the problem is that at no time do we have the impression that Jablonka tried to “fool” readers into believing that he had the collaboration of Goldman. It is clear that his approach was carried out alone. All the sources consulted and used appear at the end of the book.
We are far from Laurence Catinot-Crost, author of the new biography on Céline Dion entitled Tell me Celine, who told the French media that she had spoken with the singer for several months when this was false.
All this brings us to the famous question: does an author have the right to tell the life of a personality without their consent? To that, I answer yes without hesitation.
Afterwards, it’s a question of professionalism, rigor, talent, honesty and love. In the case of Jablonka, there is no doubt that he has boundless admiration for what he describes as “the Arc de Triomphe”.
If the book is full of falsehoods or is defamatory, that’s another matter. The publishing house and the author are accountable.
After the publication of four biographical works, I wondered a lot about the role and relevance of those who embark on such an exercise. I have come to the conclusion that it is the level of awareness of the responsibility that falls on us that must take precedence. At each stage of this long and perilous work, the biographer must remember this.
He has the wealth of a life in his hands, he must take care of it.
I have often been asked what is the best way to get closer to the “truth”. An autobiography ? A biography with the collaboration of the artist? A biography without his collaboration? None of the above !
A big fan of the genre, I read some brilliant autobiographies and others that were just facades. I have also read biographies made without the person “biographed” which were captivating and others which benefited from the collaboration of the artist and which 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 invented.
I understand the frustration of personalities who see their lives filtered by a third party they do not know. They have the feeling that something is missing from them and that the story they read has nothing to do with the events they experienced. It’s normal, this look (even altered over time) only belongs to us.
But a biography is first and foremost the point of view of the person writing it. Otherwise, let’s 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 gaze.
Writing a biography is like going on a treasure hunt. We don’t know what we’ll discover. What really matters is the pleasure the researcher will feel in exhuming the chest.
Goldman
Threshold
400 pages