Customer Reviews

Clapton: Edge Of Darkness, Updated Edition

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

"edge of darkness" was an excellent read. other bios of clapton tend to gloss over the periods that are so well-known. this book goes into detail about them and more importantly, about clapton himself. this book takes him off the pedestal he himself may never have wanted to be on and places him directly with the rest of us.

From a musician's standpoint, I feel that some of the prose of this biography was a little hard to withstand. Don't get me wrong, it was definitely an interesting book. It's just that I wish the story contained MORE about Clapton's music throughout the years, lyrically and theoretically, his equipment and so on ... Clapton the musician. The author did express his opinions of his songs and his albums, which I disagreed with a lot. But opinions are just that: individual likes and dislikes, and everyone's are different. TOO MUCH stress was on Clapton's personality, love life, and inner demons ... the celebrity stuff.

I am not sure why the author wrote this book except to make money. It would seem the very crime he accuses Clapton of committing, he commits in this book- namely, not really loving what he is doing. The author indicates having sympathy for Clapton, but what comes across seems to be very distorted. While I do not know all the gossip about Clapton, this book reduces his life to simply adding up 'good' and 'bad' acts. Yes, Clapton by all reports was not a healthy adult (I don't know about now) and not well integrated. The author, rather then developing this lack of integration, becomes overly obessed with the 'bad Clapton'. If Clapton's playing was never anything but copying the old blues masters, how can the author complain that his newer music doesn't evoke the excitment and innovation of his earlier playing. You can't have it both ways. The author takes acts of kindness and indicates they are really self-serving acts. I don't want to defend Clapton, but rather wished the author would have viewed his subject in a neutral manner and integrated his upbring/childhood, how he dealth with life and how he made music as opposed to taking the easy way out by doing the 'Mommy Dearest' routine.

This book is the perfect counterbalance to Ray Coleman's hilariously fawning autohrized biography, "Clapton."

Coleman's and Sanford's books are polar opposites in the treatment of the subject and somehere between the two extremes a fairly good picture of Clapton emerges.

If you seek objectivity, read this one first. It is a harsher, more detached, yet no less accurate, assesment of his life and musical influence.

If you are a Clapton fan seeking to reenforce your perception of, "Clapton as God", read Coleman's book.

This is an interesting read on Eric Clapton; very different than the mostly adulatory work that is in other EC biographers' work. While most of Sanford conclusions on EC are interesting and seem well thought out, should be taken with "a grain of salt". Good book to balance out the scales as the other end portrays him almost saintly- something he himself never claimed to be.

Definately one of the best books written about EC. Author pulls no punchs and gives a raw discription of the man and his times

I admit from the outset that I am a longtime Clapton fan. I have read just about every book and magazine article written about him over the last 30 years and have viewed many of the video bios about him. This book is by far the worst. It seems to me that the author had a negative bias from the beginning.

Clapton is no saint and his past is what it is. Nevertheless, it appears that the author interviewed only those people who had a grudge or bone to pick. From the rather unflattering cover picture to his reviews of EC's work this biography is nothing more than an anti-Clapton diatribe. Even his compliments are backhanded. Sanford's claim that he "came to have a quite genuine and deep sympathy for [Clapton]" rings very hollow. He seems to have found every reason to trash the man and the majority of his work.

Those interested in a balanced view should avoid this book.

For Clapton fans a must, but the trite & unsubstantiated narrative made me feel at times like was reading the National Enquirer (Do I really need to read rumors about Clapton sleeping with Jagger -- NO!) Of course as a Clapton fan (especially of work with Cream and Dominos) I couldn't put the book down - what it lacks in historical & musical perspective it more than makes up for in juicy gossip! The Shapiro bio is considerably better, but the fact remains that the definitive work on this incredibly talented and complex man has not yet been written!

Lots of details of Eric's life...too many for most readers. Author is British, and the writing is not edited for American audiences. The content is not always believable, and some author's opinions are repeated, and repeated.

The author clearly received marching orders from a random publisher to write about Clapton...this book started on a premise and the author spends the rest of the book trying to prove/defend that premise.

What was the premise of this book? Namely that Clapton is a dysfunctional guitar god. Read between the history and hearsay and it is abundantly clear Clapton suffers from alcoholism/addiction. His actions and psychological pathology make that point strikingly clear. It doesnt make what Clapton did right - far from it. But the obvious wasnt the intention of this author. His goal was guitar god on a skewer.

This book spends so little time on the actual music...Derek & the Dominoes, Cream, Blind Faith that you wonder if the author even knows its significance.

All in all - crummy journalism...worse book.