When biography becomes literary grave robbing

April 10, 2017 9.36am GMT

By Alex Burke

Daniel James’s planned book about the reclusive artist Ezra Maas raises serious questions about the ethics of cultural ownership and the limits of biography.

Ezra Maas’s death has yet to be officially announced by his estate, but already the vultures are circling to pick the meat from his bones. Yes, he was a public figure, but does that give journalists a right to publish his private letters and diaries as well as the half-remembered recollections from friends and enemies, collaborators and lovers? The dead cannot defend themselves and, while families left behind can write letters to their lawyers or publish statements expressing their disgust, by that point the damage is already done.

If he goes ahead, with his unauthorised book, James will become the latest in a long line of journalists and biographers who succeed only in unmasking their own nature by shamelessly digging through the private lives of deceased celebrities. He will face the fate suffered by biographers such as Jonathan Bate, and journalists like Claudio Gatti. Writing for The New Yorker essayist and journalist Janet Malcom left no one in doubt about her opinion of Bate in her scathing review of his book, Ted Hughes: The Unauthorised Life. Bate, an Oxford Professor and Shakespeare scholar, had the approval of Hughes’s widow Carol withdrawn when she realised his book was going to reveal details of his personal life from letters and correspondence.

Similarly, journalist Claudio Gatti received widespread criticism for exposing the real identity of Italian novelist Elena Ferrante. The journalist spent months combing through financial accounts and property records to unmask the author. He had no right to do this. Ferrante chose to write under a pseudonym for a reason and this should have been respected.

Powerful custodianship of Ezra Maas’s estate by his wife Helena and their representatives, The Maas Foundation, has so far prevented journalists from violating the artist’s desire for his work to speak for him. He was intensely private in life and his wishes should be respected whether he is alive or dead. James has said that he simply wants to discover the truth about the artist, but if the writer follows in the footsteps of those biographers who have crossed the line before him, then I fear his legacy, like theirs, will always be that of a grave robber.