Customer Reviews

Hitchhiker: A Biography of Douglas Adams

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

 

 

It's clear that M. J. Simpson knows a lot about the bare facts of Douglas Adams' life, but there is little heart or deep understanding in this biography. Because Douglas Adams is an intrinsically interesting character, the book is still enjoyable enough to read for the anecdotes as well as for its descriptions of Douglas' projects. I found it interesting to read about the many failures or quasi failures that followed the publication of the Hitchiker's books. It just goes to show that talent is often not enough and that success is relative. The author seems to have a strangely forensic delight in finding inconsistencies in different versions of some of the anecdotes surrounding Douglas' life... Which I suppose may be of interest to some, but for me that wasn't really something I was terribly interested in anyway. Amazingly, even John Lloyd's forward is a bit critical: He writes, "The initial conditions in which Douglas was saddled were rather more trying, I suspect, than the author of this book has been able either to discern or to put in print."

John Lloyd's forward is really quite wonderful, and I would gladly read more material from his hand about "The Big Man." As for this book, I'd say if you enjoy Mr. Adams' books and you're looking for some moderately enjoyable bed-time reading, this isn't such a bad choice.

What's most impressive about this volume is how often it is forced to go against conventional wisdom. Through astonishingly complete research, Simpson manages to root out dozens of stories Adams told about his work and then provide the true story behind Adams' half-truths. In all, a wonderfully assembled timeline of an interesting person.

How ironic that a writer whose Achilles Heel was character development should have a biography that suffers from the same malaise. I don't think I've ever finished such a long biography with so little insight into the inner workings of the subject. This book is remarkably shallow, spending page after page discussing Adams' projects but precious little space analyzing who Douglas Adams was and what made him tick. Even non sci fi fans are familiar with the chatty, insecure, name-dropping public persona Adams portrayed, but I was hoping this book would look far beyond that. Sadly, it does not, and thus showcases a man who is as one-dimensional and underdeveloped as the characters who inhabit his novels.

Simpson says at the beginning of this book and towards the end that he doesn't think Douglas Adams was a liar. But the vast bulk of the book doesn't support this qualification. Perhaps Adams refused to grant Simpson an interview at some point. Perhaps Simpson just didn't like him, or felt envious that he was an accomplished writer. But why bother writing a biography in that case? I suppose having a petty score to settle would be one reason.

(Since posting my original review, I've learned that Simpson was disgruntled about not having any of his little sci-fi conventions attended by Douglas. This is a good reason for a nasty book? I think not.)

Trying to provide a balanced account and not taking everything one's subject has said as gospel is one thing. But going to great lengths, using wholly faulty logic, quotes from people barely on the fringes of the subject's life, and constant correlation without causation to make quotes look like contradictions in spite of the fact that they can actually happily coexist (and even often support each other, even though Simpson does all he can to explain why they might be at odds), is quite another. And believing the hazy memories of someone tangential rather than words from the horse's mouth doesn't reveal much sympathy for the subject.

Basically, Simpson makes Adams look like, depending on the page, a complete liar or a bumbling idiot (neither of which he was) -- throughout the entire book. It reeks of some kind of childish revenge, which would explain why Simpson waited until after Adams' death to write it; and tedious trivia and statistics are spewed to this end without any insight into the man or his life whatsoever, as other reviewers have pointed out.

Simpson also makes snide remarks about Douglas at every possible opportunity, such as "It wasn't an interview. It was a Douglas Adams monologue, and not a terribly interesting one." Someone reading the biography of an author would in fact be extremely interested in hearing an account of how one of that author's novels got published. Why the haughtiness? Simpson's thesis near the end is the heinous and unqualified opinion that Adams didn't write good books unless an editor or coauthor helped him.

Simpson even invents some new and intriguing words, such as "themself."

Don't waste your money on this. Don't Panic and Wish You Were Here are much, much, much, much, much better.

And better than pretty much anything else out there right now. Douglas Adams may be dead (or only hiding), but I'd rather read him or even just read about him than a lot of the self-congratulatory cyber-muck being peddled as SF these days. Hitchhiker is exhaustive (at times, exhausting), dead-on, funny, sad, nostalgic and true. For anyone you know who's read all of DA, or even just some of DA, this is a perfect complement, and a perfect capstone. Neil Gaiman's Don't Panic might be funnier, but Hitchhiker is richer.

I love Doug Adams' writing, and was hoping to learn about him as a writer and a person. I think I might have been better served to choose Neil Gaiman's "Don't Panic" for this instead.

I found this book to be rather tedious. I wanted to come away from the book with insight into Douglas's beliefs, personality, and inner workings, but instead, I came away with a head full of dates and statistics and names names names names names.

I forced myself to keep reading, but really didn't find the book interesting until the last couple of chapters.

I bought this book on a whim in a used bookstore for $9 dollars because
of the inviting picture of Douglas Adams on the cover. (Sadly now I see I could have bought
it for 92 cents on Amazon, though it probably isn't worth that, especially if you include the mailing fees.)
I love Douglas Adams. M. J. Simpson...seems to not exactly HATE Douglas Adams. but
clearly loathes him...taking every opportunity to call him "a liar", "weak", stealing from Monty Python--etc, etc. Ow! Lots and lots of lists of people and titles and dates of things that don't matter.
A strange, sad, dull, book.
The only part of redeeming value is the foreword by Neil Gaiman, who clearly was fond of Douglas Adams as the rest of his readers were, except for the Author of this Biography...odd that.
Instead of selling this book back to the used bookstore, or depositing it at the local thrift store, I will toss it into the trash, so no one else will mistake the bookcover for a good, warm read of Mr. Adams.

Simpson says at the beginning of this book and towards the end that he doesn't think Douglas Adams was a liar. But the vast bulk of the book doesn't support this qualification. Perhaps Adams refused to grant Simpson an interview at some point. Perhaps Simpson just didn't like him, or felt envious that he was an accomplished writer. But why bother writing a biography in that case? I suppose having a petty score to settle would be one reason.

(Since posting my original review, I've learned that Simpson was disgruntled about not having any of his little sci-fi conventions attended by Douglas. This is a good reason for a nasty book? I think not.)

Trying to provide a balanced account and not taking everything one's subject has said as gospel is one thing. But going to great lengths, using wholly faulty logic, quotes from people barely on the fringes of the subject's life, and constant correlation without causation to make quotes look like contradictions in spite of the fact that they can actually happily coexist (and even often support each other, even though Simpson does all he can to explain why they might be at odds), is quite another. And believing the hazy memories of someone tangential rather than words from the horse's mouth doesn't reveal much sympathy for the subject.

Basically, Simpson makes Adams look like, depending on the page, a complete liar or a bumbling idiot (neither of which he was) -- throughout the entire book. It reeks of some kind of childish revenge, which would explain why Simpson waited until after Adams' death to write it; and tedious trivia and statistics are spewed to this end without any insight into the man or his life whatsoever, as other reviewers have pointed out.

Simpson also makes snide remarks about Douglas at every possible opportunity, such as "It wasn't an interview. It was a Douglas Adams monologue, and not a terribly interesting one." Someone reading the biography of an author would in fact be extremely interested in hearing an account of how one of that author's novels got published. Why the haughtiness? Simpson's thesis near the end is the heinous and unqualified opinion that Adams didn't write good books unless an editor or coauthor helped him.

Simpson even invents some new and intriguing words, such as "themself."

Don't waste your money on this. Don't Panic and Wish You Were Here are much, much, much, much, much better.

...and then some. I have read all of the books out there about Douglas Adams and his work, and this is by far the most in depth and comprehensive(as well as the most fun). This work is at times funny, personal and warm, at others written with astonishing factual detail. Mr. Simpson's meticulous research and attention to detail, as well as his personal passion for the life and work of Douglas Adams stand out like Douglas in a crowd. I highly recommend this book for any DNA fan.

It took me a year to read Hitchhiker, but not because of its length--only because of the level of detail. I had to take long and frequent breaks from the text.

I have been a fan of the Hitchhikers' Guide to the Galaxy since childhood--probably around 30 years. However, I was always a fairly solitary fan. Never went to cons, never ventured to alt.fan.douglas-adams, never joined "Plural Z9 Plural Z Alpha," the official fan club. I never knew these things existed nor that Douglas Adams himself was aware of them, until I read this book.

M.J. Simpson has approached Douglas Adams as a fan and admirer, but one with a determination to get the facts straight and to share with the reader not just the ultimate result, but the circuitous route he sometimes had to take to get to that final result. For instance, when Simpson approaches a paragraph in which he intends to share the date of a meeting between three people, he includes quotes from five people about who was where when, who was managing who's calendar, and who couldn't have possibly been there because he was in New York at the time having the most memorable roast beef sandwich of his life with his fiancee. This commitment to accuracy sometimes makes for belabored writing, but you can't read the book without complete confidence that you're getting the straight dope. Everything cited, quoted, or in any way referenced in this book is meticulously footnoted--Ironic, considering the sometimes chaotic approach Douglas took to life.

But, beyond the writing and the impulse I had to edit every sentence, I have to say that It's All Here. Everything you might consider significant. Douglas' growing up, his relationships, his passions, his distractions, his contacts, his foibles, his genius, his enterprises... just everything. And it is told with such sympathy for Douglas that even as you read the details of these fouled-up anecdotes and exaggerated stories he told, you understand and you don't condemn him.

I highly recommended this particular biography for anyone who enjoys having an encyclopedic knowledge of a subject, particularly if that person is also a fan of any of Douglas Adams' works or even just those who are creative and lucky.

But it won't be fast.