Arthur Miller is one of those writers whose massive output means you have read and seen more of his stuff than you think you have. E.g. I've seen productions of 'The Crucible', but I didn't realise that he wrote the first draft of what became 'On the Waterfront' (the final version was written by Bud Schulberg). Miller has his artistic origins in the New York left-wing literati set that included Clifford Odets, Lillian Helman, Dashell Hammat and (for a little while) Elia Kazan. His relationship with Kazan is a key part of the major drama in this meandering memoir - Miller's dealings with the House Un-American Activities Committee (HUAC) during the 'McCarthy era' (which, as Miller makes clear, involved far more than just Joe McCarthy himself).Unlike Kazan, Miller refused to name names of people he knew were in, or involved in, the Communist Party in the 1930s. He was actually tried for contempt of Congress - although he was able to ultimately beat the charges by demonstrating the HUAC had displayed the bad faith. Kazan seems to have been convinced that he would never have a film career if he didn't 'name names'. He gives Kazan a generous character reference, however Miller seems to have been able to have a successful career despite refusing to co-operate with HUAC (Broadway may have been a better place to have a post-McCarthy career than Hollywood).One of the ways that HUAC 'convicted' people of being Communists, even when they denied it, was to bring in an 'Expert' on Communism who assessed people's words and deeds for Communist inclinations. In his trial defence Miller turned the tables on this approach by calling as a expert witness one of these 'Experts' who had repudiated this entire approach. He was an ex-Conservative politician and military man who was in charge of an office in the Eisenhower administration that received information from the public about who was a Red. Looking at the sheer volume of nonsensical 'denunciations' that were just score settling, misunderstandings, or lies; not to mention the cases of mistaken identity (woe betide you looking for work in the 1950s if you just had the same name as a 'Red'); not to mention the ridiculous level of parsing of opinions to determine if they were Marxist, or socialist, or liberal ideas - the Expert honestly arrived at the view that the whole process was dangerous and discredited.A lot of the interest in this book would be driven by Marilyn Monroe, to whom Miller was married in the 1950s and 1960s. Those parts are probably the more difficult sections as I can't help thinking Miller is really an unreliable narrator on this point. I think this book is best read as a series of interesting stories - which of course is what you should expect from a playwright.
I felt in the company of a 'big man' reading this, i am a slow reader, as slow as I talk and with Millers style of writing I had to re-read many sentences and paragraphs, in my meticulous craftsmans manner I wanted to leave nothing out. It was a privelige to hear of decades past and all the problems that went with it. I originally bought this book twenty years ago but only got to page one hundred, now being older it holds me far more, what seemed a strange play such as 'Salesman' now seems very relevant. Also the film 'The Misfits' with Huston is an absolute 'must' and the film 'A View from the Bridge' Dir Sidney Lumet is outstanding. For a Limey his writing can be less than easy, but listening to him on youtube makes him much easier to read. I finished the book yesterday, he lets you down easy at the end and just want to think about it now for a few days more. As several ppl have stated here its like having the grandfather you never had. I like his style and delivery, can get a bit tricky at times but then again you are in the company of a 'big man'.
What do You think about Timebends: A Life (1995)?
The trouble with autobiographies is that only part of most people's lives is interesting. So it is here. I wanted to read about Marilyn Monroe but we get only small parts out of two chapters. Miller glosses over the breakup of his first marriage and the formation of his relationship with the most famous sex-goddess of the 20th century. You have to piece together in your own mind how and why she married a dry, not particularly attractive man, or indeed why he took the major step to marry her. Then also, I wanted to know how much sex played in her life. After all she represented the sexual dreams of most men at that time. I don't need details but some indication - she maybe have been indifferent to sex, or gloried in it. She clearly suffered sexual abuse through her climb up the Hollywood ladder, so how did this affect her? I can't believe that Miller, with all his insights into every other aspect of his and people's lives, was not curious about this himself.His prose is often vague and rambling, eg: "Glamour is a youth's form of blindness that lets in light, incoherent color, but nothing defined." If you want to learn about the world of theater in the Fifties and Sixties, or the political climate during that time, including the extensive fear of Communism and the McCarthy trials, then this book is for you.
—Pauline Butcher Bird
i love reading of writers writing but he nevers tells us when or why he chose to become a writer. i loved marilyn monroe as a teen,my first love. i can t wait till he writes of her. he began to write of her on pg 308 with much more to come. the, waiting for marilyn part, is motivating me to read on through the deep thinking of arthur miller. it was very slow in parts especially the part about his presidency of PEN,the international writers organization. it was fascinating to hear of the roots of many of his important plays. i was disappointed that he didn t write of his sex life with marilyn but he was a gentleman .
—Joe Mossa
