Joan Didion’s enduring popularity among today’s young readers is a somewhat mysterious phenomenon. So many visibly progressive, literary types seem to uncritically worship her. Really? I always think to myself, concerned that I’ve misheard them. Joan Didion, the National Review contributor? Joan Didion, the socially nostalgic Goldwater Republican? Easily disturbed by counterculture, dismissive of women’s liberation, regarded John Wayne as the paragon of masculine sexual allure? That Joan Didion? I mean, I know why I like her, but why do you?
Evidently, the image of Didion that has entered popular consciousness — the Didion who modelled for Céline, had a Netflix hagiography made about her, and smokes languidly in black and white photographs on the bonnet of her white Corvette — is an easy object for (as the young themselves might put it) an exclusively vibes-based admiration. At a recent house auction of Didion’s personal effects, which took place shortly after her death in 2021, lot 122, a bundle of 13 notebooks, sold for $11,000. That the notebooks were entirely blank seems a fitting testament to the vapid high regard bestowed on her by modish fans who value her more for her aura than for the things she wrote down.
Very few writers, of course, deserve to be judged on the basis of the fans and acolytes they inspire. That this is so in Didion’s case is rather heavily underlined by a recently published memoir by the American writer Cory Leadbeater. The Uptown Local: Joy, death and Joan Didion is his account of the nine years he worked as Didion’s personal assistant, living rent-free in her magnificent apartment on the Upper East Side. While still an undistinguished creative writing student at Columbia, Leadbeater informs us, he dined with the great and the good of New York, his life taking on the character of a “ludicrous fantasy”. In fact, it would be easy to resent Leadbeater for his good fortune alone were it not that his book provides a wealth of other, more compelling, reasons.
Cory Leadbeater has achieved something frankly remarkable. He saw Joan Didion more or less every day for nine years, yet he has not a single interesting or original thing to say about her. Indeed, a few chapters into the book, she more or less vanishes. Instead, we learn a great deal about Leadbeater’s unhappy, though not deprived, childhood in New Jersey; his tortured inability to write a novel; and his hatred for his difficult father, who hit him as a child, and was later jailed for real-estate fraud. Nor is Leadbeater’s side-lining of Didion evidence of tact towards his late employer. “I confess,” he writes, “that there’s no one and nothing I wouldn’t put into this book if it meant I could make something beautiful and lasting… has it worked?”
Well, no. It hasn’t. The Uptown Local is a staggeringly tedious book. Nauseatingly self-involved, it inflicts an enormous punishment on the reader lured in on the understanding they were going to find something out about Joan Didion. It must be conceded, though, that in its way the book is oddly representative of the maddeningly over-produced genre of highly literary first-personal non-fiction, which publishers seem never to tire of inflicting on what remains of the contemporary reading public.
It is no small irony, of course, that the alienated, inward-looking style Leadbeater adopts is one Didion did so much to popularise. In the wrong hands, as Leadbeater proves, it is a truly dangerous inspiration. Consider the scene after Didion’s death on 23 December: “I took down her Christmas tree through tears. The tears were because the metaphor was so obvious that it was just the kind of thing we would have laughed about.” Note, this is a man who cries not about people, but about the obviousness of metaphors. In fact, none of life’s revelations are equal to disarming Leadbeater’s unerring instinct for pretension. In another scene, his wife tells him she is pregnant; “I made her stand in front of the giant Auden portrait in my office and hold the test up, and I took a photo.”
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeThank you. Oddly this chimed well with today’s James Marriot article in The Times. Keep reading.
I love James’s writing!!
Thanks for the review. Wasn’t much chance I would have read the book before. Zero chance now.
Is it any more valid than worshipping John Lennon or David Bowie?
‘Vapid’. Google’s spell checker gets more dumb on a daily basis. The grammar checker is even worse. Is there anyone is silicon valley who knows how to use an apostrophe?
Poor Joan. Hadn’t she suffered enough without having that eejit under her roof?
Ouch!
I feel I was lured into this article thinking I would learn something about Joan Didion only to read about another insipid, narcissistic millennial.
So true.
II loved many of Didion’s essays and her brilliant writing. However, one of her books infuriated me. When my husband died, I bought The Year of Magical Thinking, which was about coping with her husband’s death. The book turned out to be about how rich and famous she was. Name dropping famous restaurants, buying her robe at a store on Rodeo Avenue (extremely expensive). Name dropping rich and rich and famous friends, and so on. The book had nothing to do with her husband’s death. I was fooled. It was a testament of how far her writing had fallen.
Her very early stuff was amazing but she fell in love with fame and it made her a weak narcissistic writer.
I’ve mainly enjoyed the essays I find on UnHerd, but, with precious few exceptions, I would describe the style employed by many of the contributors to lack focus. This piece, for example, starts with two paragraphs discussing Ms. Didion, and it is only in the third paragraph that we learn the essay is really about a memoir written by Cory Leadbeater.
This wandering style is common among the intellectual class, but wouldn’t cut it in that part of the world where people are actually supposed to do things. The intellectual class, characterized by those whose work product begins and ends with ideas, enjoy the luxury of being immune to the consequences of being wrong. Strangely, the UnHerd editors seem to recoil away from those thinkers whose world views are shaped by the laws of Physics.
If I’m understanding correctly, because the author took two paragraphs to mention the book under review, it “lacks focus”? And this despite the fact that said two paragraphs involve the subject–Joan Didion and her admirers–of said book? Man, if that counts as “wandering” (and, by your bizarre implication, evidence of a worldview not shaped by the laws of physics), then you should probably stick to a more positivistic and pragmatic genre like, say, Ikea assembly instruction manuals.
If I may, the first two paragraphs are what we in the intellectual class call an “introduction.” Turns out it can be rather elegant and interesting to set the stage for what the essay is “really about.” What this essay is about is both the memoir and the larger–I’d argue more consequential–point about a certain faux-profound, up-its-own-ass writing/thinking/being style the author (brilliantly) puts his finger on, and so the author’s points about the shallow, naive fandom around Didion couldn’t be more germane. Essays–even book reviews–can be about more than one thing, and you don’t need to state your topic/thesis right away–this is not 11th grade English. If you felt misled, it’s likely because you missed the lede.
On your second point, you’re absolutely correct: the products of intellectuals are not judged by the same standards as those of people who actually “do things” (though I’d argue that neither are they “immune from consequences” for being wrong). But even if this were possible–and a moment’s reflection reveals it’s not–it would entirely miss the point of writing, ideas, and the humanities. Contrary to the tragically dominant (and tragically flawed) worldview of mechanistic materialism/scientism, the humanities are not lesser than the sciences because less objective (the objective/subjective dichotomy itself subverted by physics 100+ years ago, btw) nor less rational in some way. That is not their flaw but their ultimate strength. Physics might measure the world but it cannot tell us what is meaningful. Not everything that counts can be counted, and not everything that can be counted counts, said (supposedly) none other than Einstein.
https://channelmcgilchrist.com/steven-pinkers-essay/
Finally, many thanks, and bravo, to the author for naming and dismantling the infuriating inanities of this literary trend, its cringy narcissism and ultimate superficiality perhaps actually a reason for the humanities’ decline.
“He is full of enigmatic bon mots and non-sequiturs.”
Sorry, no.
He is full of shit.
Have you read the book?
It is not necessary to eat the whole egg to know that it is bad. Sometimes just the review suffices. This is $15 on Kindle I won’t be spending.
On the other hand, there are lots of laudatory reviews on Amazon — and they’re not all from professional reviewers, which I always discount fifty percent. Some real people seemed to like it. A few even thought it was about Didion. Your mileage may vary.
Uh oh, terrifying lesson in here for some of us! I’m not sure I still have it in me to write so cuttingly, however deservedly. But you’re probably right about Didion’s cultural influence. And very, very funny. Thanks.
Who in earth is going to read this?!!
Agree with your assessment of publishing today. Luckily they are not all like that. Perhaps Unherd Should have a section on literary fiction that bucks that trend.