Customer Reviews

Stuart: A Life Backwards

5 star:		(17)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(6)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

Stuart reads the manuscript of his biography. He doesn't like it. And now he has to tell Alexander Masters, his biographer, what the problem is.

Stuart begins gently: "I don't mean to be rude. I know you put a lot of work in."

And then Stuart gets specific. He'd like more "jokes, yarns, humor" and less research. In fact, he'd like a different book --- a bestseller, "like what Tom Clancy writes." Then he drops the bomb: "Alexander, you gotta start again. You gotta do better than this."

Please understand who's talking: a 30-odd year-old formerly homeless ex-junkie who has been in and out of jail, who suffers from muscular dystrophy, who was repeatedly abused as a child by his brother and a teacher. In short, a loser. What qualifies this disaster of a man to deliver literary criticism?

But one of the many great things about Stuart is his honesty. And his originality. "Do it [the book] the other way round," he advises. "Make it more like a murder mystery. What murdered the boy I was? See? Write it backwards."

Alexander Masters takes that advice. As he says, at the end of the first chapter:

"So here it is, my second attempt at the story of Stuart Shorter, thief, hostage taker, psycho and sociopath street raconteur, my spy on how the British chaotic underclass spend their troubled days at the beginning of the twenty-first century: a man with an important life.

"I wish I could have done it more quickly. I wish I could have presented it to Stuart before he stepped in front of the 11.15 London to King's Lynn train."

Well, that's starting at the end, isn't it? The absolute end. And Stuart was right --- it worked better that way, and on every level. First, as a reading experience: This book is, literally, like nothing you have ever read. And then, it has been praised by just about everyone with a byline. In England, where it was first published, it won the Guardian First Book Award and, in the category of biography, the Whitbread Book of the Year Award. It's being made into a television movie --- in death, everybody wants to be Stuart Shorter's friend.

Which is ironic, because, when it mattered, almost the only person who consistently showed up for Stuart was his unlikely biographer --- who was his exact opposite. Masters, born in New York, is of Mayflower stock. His parents were accomplished writers. He had a "really, really nice childhood." After college, he entered a PhD program in the philosophy of quantum mechanics. Then he started working with the homeless and --- on a grate on a London street --- met Stuart.

"Introduce Stuart to readers as he is now, a fully-fledged gawd-help-us, and he may just grab their interest right away," Masters notes. "By the time they reach his childhood, it is a matter of genuine interest how he turned into the person he is." Well, how's this for catching our attention: At the beginning of the book, Stuart announces that he's planning to kill himself. But it has to look like murder. "My brother killed himself in May. I couldn't put me mum through that again. She wouldn't mind murder so much."

That lack of sentimentality is the great strength of this biography. You want to feel sorry for someone? Look elsewhere. Terrible things happen to Stuart, but he, at least, is clear --- he did a lot of terrible things too. An unfiltered take on reality is what he's after, and an open-minded look at the way the world really works. For a screw-up, he's fearless. And smart. And brilliantly verbal.

But Stuart is angry, that's the worst of him. And when he goes over the edge, he robs. Hurts anyone in range --- once, he threatened to kill his son. Gets beaten by cops. He is --- and he knows it --- "a lawless, grade-one, society-loathing bastard." Do not be surprised by how much time he spends in prison. Or the botched suicide attempts.

Whose "fault" is all this? Well, Stuart is withering on the stupidity of Social Services. They want you to be drug-free, so they give you drug tests. But you're going to take drugs, right? So, what do you take --- mild, sweet cannabis, which hangs around in your blood for nine days? Or heroin, which disappears in just three? Why, heroin, of course. Which is how the Government, in effect, promotes hard-care drug addiction. Stupid? Very. But only a "straight" person --- that's you, dear reader --- would ever think the Government could be smart.

Better to peel away the layers. Stuart is 15 and snorting glue; five friends die, and yet he lives. Go earlier, when his illness is diagnosed. Or, finally, consider him at nine, abused by his brother and the babysitter. Stuart can't really talk about this. But Masters gets it: "In the last two years alone, my friend Stuart has on three occasions been sitting quietly alone in his flat when he has been suddenly overwhelmed by the resurrected agony of these memories, grabbed the nearest implement and butchered himself."

Stuart hid the shameful events of his childhood. Or turned them into violence, which was a judgment on him. Almost no one ever knew what had happened to him. So how could he get help?

Why does Masters say Stuart had "a very important" life? Because he went to emotional zones we avoid like the plague, and he came back and made his report on what he'd seen there. For the last two years of his life, he was more settled. And for all his modest hopes, he never didn't know that Doom hovered over him: "Homelessness --- it's not about having a home. It's about something being seriously wrong."

Maybe Stuart didn't fight for his life as we --- the drama critics in the audience, sitting in our heavily mortgaged but generally comfy homes --- might have liked. But as you read this book, your reactions matter less and less. You drop your judgments, you see things as Stuart does. And although this book is ultimately a heartbreaker, you find yourself laughing with him far more often than you'd thought possible.

Masters' boggles the mind with the creativity and poignancy of this book. The style is the first thing to hit the reader; as the reader notices that the biography goes from death to birth and not the other way around. This brilliant technique gives the book a literary style that is unique and playful; on a topic that is anything but playful.

Masters' integration of style and message is truly superb. He tries to convey the actual visceral reality of homelessness through the biography of a real homeless person. There are two things Masters attempts to elucidate and succeeds brilliantly. Firstly, he tries to illustrate how a person could become a homeless person in the first place. Second, he tries to illustrate how even in the UK, where the "System" is so much different than in the US, there is little positive result in either system. In many ways, the "System" only exacerbates the original conditions that created the environment to turn a person to the street.

Interestingly, Masters tells lots of amazing details about homelessness. His statement that it only takes about 4 weeks before a new homeless person becomes acclimatized to the "homeless life" or "rough sleeping" as he calls it, and finds that it is not so bad and they don't want to go back. This speed is almost inconceivable.

Masters is not high and mighty in his book, he does not claim to have an answer to the problem. But rather, he looks at the problem in its nakedness in order to try and find a resolution. The book is truly a wonderful example of how a person could get to a condition of permanent homelessness. It is recommended for all readers with a social conscience.

"Stuart: A Life Backwards", the new book by Alexander Masters, deserves every accolade that can be awarded. With a keen writer's eye, a gift for narrative and a friendship that lasted only four years, Masters recounts the life of Stuart Clive Shorter whose untimely death in 2002 inspired this work.

The essence of Stuart's life seemed to be courage in the face of so much adversity that one wonders how he lived even into his early thirties. His drug addiction, his MS, bouts of homelessness countered by months of living in small flats, an incestuous relationship with his brother....all of this did not keep Stuart from enjoying a certain high degree of humor and acceptance of the way of life that only he could lead. Masters takes these things into account as he spends some of his own time among Stuart's acquaintances on the street. While the author keeps an appropriate distance he can't help but being amused and fascinated by this man about whom he would eventually write.

"Stuart" is not an easy book to get through, at times. Far from your summertime read at the beach, this book is better read without distraction because Masters comments with great care not only on Stuart, but his situation at all aspects of Stuart's life. Writing it "backwards" works very well in this case, because it endears the reader to Stuart as the book continues.

Stuart Shorter is not a person that most of us would ever get to know or maybe even care to know, but Alexander Masters has shown us that there are those people in life we either overlook or tend to forget. I'm glad he reminds us and I highly recommend "Stuart" for its warmth and complexity.

I struggled with this book at first, but I'm glad I stuck with it. It's worth the effort. You can almost see the sweat that went into researching and writing 'Stuart.' It's really a fantastic research and assimilation job by Alexander Masters. Though called 'A Life Backwards,' Masters tells us two interwoven tales: you get the flashpoints of Stuart's life told in reverse, and - simultaneously - we get an ongoing, running narrative of the author and subject's current relationship through the course of various events like street protests, doctor's appointments, hospital visits, and random violent flare-ups by the book's protagonist.

The brilliance of laying out the life backwards is the step-by-step revealing of the seminal events of Stuart's early life. We're presented with one jawdropper after another. While even Stuart wouldn't have condoned much of his own behavior (indeed, he comes across as his own worst critic), Masters point at tracing the arc of Stuart's life is that if you're one to look for root causes for bad behavior, this guy has them in spades. You would not wish Stuart's childhood on anyone.

Three things stick out:

1) Masters effort. It took work, work and more work to build this story. The guy deserves all the praise he gets.

2) The relationship between author and subject. Though they could not be more different, you see and feel the affection they've built for each other.

3) Masters' exasperation. Every time he thought he had Stuart figured out, the guy would go and do something inexplicably beyond the pale. And, as a reader, *you* get exasperated as well. Masters portrays Stuart as someone you want to like, but Stuart does not make the liking easy. At all.

This was an absorbing tale that made an immediate impact. kudos to the author. This book details the life of a man usually ignored by society. Alexander first meets Stuart as he slouches by a doorway begging for money. Usually we walk by and forget about the incident, like the author (to an extent), but this book addresses - what if we learned about this person's life? Is this person less valuable or important then those deemed acceptable by society? If truth be told, the sections told by Stuart are the most interesting parts. The more I learned about Stuart, the faster I read on to learn more.

Providing details about Stuart will ruin the impact of a story that needs to be read. It is not a book written by an author preaching but gets the point across all the same. You first meet Stuart as a man in his early 30s who is honest about himself and honorable in his own way. Reading about his childhood only highlights the tragedy. It is depressing to think how how many suffer the same fate. This is not a lighthearted read! Stuart had great potential and it was squashed out of him. Alexander Masters does a phenomenal job of allowing Stuart to live on.

This story starts with the catalyst of their unlikely friendship, two charity workers being sentenced, and builts from there by going backwards. The sections where Alexander catalogues exactly how Stuart (or anyone in his position) lives his day-to-day life was eye opening for this reader.

This book proved to me that every person has an important story to tell. Outside of my immediate circle, I pay attention to people who lead newsworthy or over-the-top lives. I need to pay more attention to everyone around me even if they appear invisible because they are not and they perhaps, have more important things to say if only I would listen.

What an interesting book. The story itself serves less as a cautionary tale, or even something interesting, than a centerpiece for a more intangible discussion about the nature of man kind, which I will come to near the end of my review. Before that, there is some other stuff to get out of the way.

First, here is what DID work about the book.

The main characters, Stuart and Alexander, present us with an interesting dichotomy. There are those who suggest that Alexander is "too present" for a biographer, but I tend to disagree. Without the juxtaposition of Alexander, Stuart would seem alien and unreal. His reactions would seem too extreme, and we wouldn't feel like we knew him. With Alexander in the picture, we are exposed to a first-hand witness and interactor of Stuart, and we get to see just how aggravating Stuart is. Often, Alexander stifles the urge to smack Stuart, and occasionally he even expresses his desire to see Stuart die. They are not friends in the common sense of the term. Rather, they share an interest in understanding Stuart, and Stuart in sharing information about the homeless, to help them.

The timeline of the book, going backward (and forward) at the same time, generally worked, although it was confusing at times. As A. R. Grenier points out in his/her review, the author jumps around considerably. While this is, perforce, necessary due to the nature of the biography, it does get confusing at times. Perhaps dates when things occur would have made it easier. I would have enjoyed them. The writing was, overall, good, and the nature of the language was appropriate, given the topic. The presentation of the other people who were rough living was, at times, quite amusing (particularly the two who are deaf who get into an argument, and one steals the other's hearing aid so that she won't leave. Priceless and touching.) While some, like Andrew Ellington, thought that the style outweighed the substance, I would tend to disagree.

Second, here is what DIDN'T work about the book.

As Kathy Parsons mentions in her review, the British terminology can be a bit thick, and sometimes it becomes nearly impossible for an American audience to understand it. While this lends credibility, and is actually nice in some respects, a short glossary for the less obvious things would have been nice.

Unlike Ace, who appreciated "Masters' Thurber-like drawings", saying that they, "beautifully depict the frenetic demonic pace at which Stuart careens through his life," I found them distracting, awful, confusing, and regretful. Their presence was the singly worst thing about the book for me, with one exception, which I will get to now.

According to Jesse Kornbluth "Head Butler", "[the] lack of sentimentality is the great strength of this biography. You want to feel sorry for someone? Look elsewhere. Terrible things happen to Stuart, but he, at least, is clear --- he did a lot of terrible things too. An unfiltered take on reality is what he's after, and an open-minded look at the way the world really works." I respectfully disagree. I think that the book breaks its back across the dilemma whether to be honest and searching, which it is quite often (refreshingly) and being an exercise in excusiology. For example, in Chapter 9, a friend of Stuart's is mentioned, who had formerly been a bubble-gum blowing champion. It is unclear whether it is meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but the author states, "Poor fellow. Who can blame him for turning to a life of crime and terrifying old post-office ladies?" While from this mere glimpse, it seems sarcastic, other portions make it seem less likely, such as Alexander's constant confusion about how someone like Stuart, who is well-meaning, kind, and self-knowledgable, could end up on the street and in prison (uh, because he is dangerous and unstable, Mr. Masters?) In addition, there are constant mentions of how Stuart is considered a banner case for someone redeeming their life, despite the fact that he is perpetually in trouble, and through the course of the contemporary portion of the book, Stuart is facing charges, potentially for attempted murder. I think that it becomes quite telling about the excuses that people consider valid when you have served multiple prison terms, you are homeless, alcoholic, addicted to heroin, violent, and self-destructive, and people consider you a success case, because you were abused as a child. Says something about excusiology.

Perhaps the most interesting thing about this book actually takes place at a level above the main narrative. A few other reviewers have almost touched upon what I am going to say, so I want to mention what they said.

Andrew Ellington
[Alexander] states that these childhood traumas should not directly create a monster yet he doesn't interject any other reasons, any other thoughts to counteract out initial response to Stuart's situation; that he was indeed created by his surroundings.

Terry Crock
The book is well written and even entertaining, but its greatest achievement is the insight into the mind and ways of the thinking of Stuart.

What both of these reviewers mention in common is Stuart's situation and mindset. No one, including Alexander Masters or Stuart Shorter, really understands what caused Stuart to become the way that he is. Perhaps the reason is that none of them can put Stuart's life into proper order. The likeliest reason for this is that Stuart himself can't do it. An interesting connection in my mind developed between Stuart and the main character from Haruki Murakami's Hard Boiled Wonderland and the End of the World. In that novel, the character is the only person, of dozens, to survive a procedure allowing them to biologically encrypt data. As it turns out, he is able to survive when so many others died, because he is uniquely capable of ordering his internalized chaos into a coherent story. Stuart, on the other hand, is unable to do so. Commonly, Alexander will ask him about details from his past, and is given only vague, meaningless answers, because Stuart himself cannot turn the events into a narrative. This is perhaps the biggest difference between Stuart and his sister, and it may explain why they have such different reactions to their stresses. Stuart's sister, rather than turning into a sociopathic, violent, danger to society, while his sister becomes a contributing member of society. Perhaps this is the explanation that they were looking for.

Regardless of the reason, Stuart's life became a tortured mess, filled with violence, self-loathing, and destructive behavior. Reading about it is often sad and rarely amusing. If you're interested in the stories of those who live on the fringes of our society, or in reading about how wrong one life can go, this book is for you. I will stop short of recommending it unequivocally to everyone, the way that some have, but I will say that it is certainly appropriate for some readers.

B-

Harkius

Stuart Shorter did a lot of living, most of it not very pleasant, before his tragic death-by-train at the age of thirty-three. A victim of muscular dystrophy, Stuart was ostracized and ridiculed by children his age because of the way he walked. He suffered at the hands of sexual predators, both in his own home, and in the Cambridge, England, facility he lived in after being placed "in care." His drug usage progressed all the way from glue sniffing to heroin and his thievery landed him in more than a dozen prisons - where he would spend several years of his short life. When not locked up, Stuart Shorter lived on the streets and, though people feared his tendency toward violence, he most often managed to do more physical damage to himself than to others.

When Alexander Masters, while studying at Cambridge University, met him, Stuart Shorter was more in control of his life than he had been for a long time. He was living in his own small flat and had limited his use of alcohol and drugs enough to keep himself from getting into much new trouble with the law. Masters, an advocate for the homeless, saw the spark in Stuart that made his story an exceptionally tragic one and the two worked together for over three years to get that story down on paper. The result is "Stuart: A Life Backwards."

Neither believed that the early trauma and taunting associated with Stuart's illness predestined him to homelessness, severe drug addiction, or his violent nature. There was much more to it, and Stuart's question "What murdered the boy I was?" became the central theme of the book. It was when they hit on the idea of telling Stuart's story in reverse, a backwards biography of sorts, that a variety of answers was unearthed for their consideration.

"Stuart: A Life Backwards" is largely told in Stuart's own words along with Alexander's reaction to his stories about prison life, school days, homelessness, violence, sexual abuse, and drugs. It begins at the point the two first meet, when Stuart is 29 years old, and progresses backward by jumps of roughly five years all the way to Stuart's birth. Each of the segmented periods includes a real-time conversation between Stuart and Alexander about those years plus what the author learned through his own research.

As Stuart and Alexander search for the answer to his question, Stuart becomes a unique, and surprisingly insightful, person in the eyes of the reader. As the real tragedy of his life is revealed, one comes to believe that Stuart cannot possibly come to a good end - and, sadly, he does not.

Alexander Masters provides an interesting look into a lifestyle seldom described through the eyes of someone actually living it, especially someone self-aware to the extent that Stuart is, a man struggling to find answers of his own. What a shame it is that Stuart was not around long enough to see the finished product.

Despite what the title may insinuate, this is not `The Curious Case of Stuart Shorter'. But, like the film adaptation of Fitzgerald's short story, `Stuart: A Life Backwards' is a lot of style, little substance. I know that sounds harsh, and I did enjoy this novel (as well as the movie in which I just compared it), but truth be told it is not something we haven't read before. Stuart's life is never given true definition; nothing to separate it from the many others who have suffered, aside from a unique delivery. Masters' voice is much louder than Stuart's, which is a shame since this is Shorter's story, not Masters'.

Let's see if I can say what I'm thinking here.

First and foremost, Alexander Masters is a phenomenal writer. His prose and his delivery are for the most part outstanding. He knows how to grab you and keep you reigned in no matter what words he's spewing. You want to read this book.

You need to read this book.

That is a true testament to talent, and Masters has that in spades. What he has in style though, he lacks in development. The sad thing with `Stuart' is that it opens with such promise and yet ends almost abysmally. Ok, I guess that word is a little strong. It doesn't end abysmally, but it doesn't end well either. The problem is that this is a book (biography if you will) that feels as if it goes no where. Stuart's life was a trainwreck, and as the book progresses and his early childhood is unveiled it becomes more and more obvious why he turned out like he did, but Masters doesn't work hard enough to piece together any sort of poignancy here. He states that these childhood traumas should not directly create a monster yet he doesn't interject any other reasons, any other thoughts to counteract out initial response to Stuart's situation; that he was indeed created by his surroundings.

It just feels like a wasted effort.

Stuart Shorter was a homeless drug addict who spent most of his life behind bars, running from a childhood that lurked behind every corner. Alexander, having worked in hostels for the homeless, meets Stuart under unusual circumstances and starts a relationship with him; a friendship that is as stressful as it is intriguing.

I won't get into the atrocities of Stuart's life, which I feel are best left to the reader to uncover for his or herself, but I will say that he went through more than most could handle. I laughed, I cried, I wept, I was angered, I was frustrated; all things that one expects from a good book. In all respects this is a good book, at times even a great one. Like I mentioned, Masters is a masterful writer. Starting at the end of Stuart's life and working to the beginning was an inspired direction, and even if it winds up somewhat confusing at times (there are chapters within sections that leave the designated time in Stuart's life and can become rather hard to place) it is truly remarkable crafted. My issues lie in Masters final summary of Stuart's life. I expected something a little more profound; but maybe that was just wishful thinking. I just truly expected Masters to bring everything together in the end and dazzle us with a heavy, emotional, resounding message but instead he simply ends it.

Still, this is a must read. Masters is very knowledgeable of his subject and his thoughts on the homeless process and the life of a troubled man is very touching and sincere. This is an author I will gladly revisit and this is a book I will recommend to many. It is not perfect, but it had perfection in its sights. In the end it garners a low B from me.

Stuart Shorter (deceased) may not have been anybody you would want to have actually met, but once you read this story of his life, you will have trouble forgetting him. During his short unhappy life he had to cope with various addictions and alcoholism. He was a petty and incompetent thief. And he was more than a little mad. Yet it would be wrong to call him a loser, he was a man who played as best he could the very bad hand that life had dealt him.

As the title implies, this biography introduces Stuart at age 29 and proceeds to trace the stages of his life back to an almost normal childhood. This is a story of the utter failure of both government institutions and private charities to arrest Stuarts fall into the depths to become what Masters calls a "chaotic" homeless person. That is a person one step below the bottom rung of the social ladder. Along the way we see the mindless brutality of the police towards the mentally disadvantaged, the horrors of official and private `shelters', and the general inadequacy of the treatment of homeless and mentally confused persons. Many of the stories that come out of Stuart's life border on sanctioned lunacy such as the police arrest of two honest and hardworking for social workers for failing to stop drug use among their clients. In the end, in spite of some very funny stories and events, this is a very sobering and even scary book that reveals the major failure of society to care and protect its most vulnerable members.

Now it should be noted that Stuart is English and was failed by English Society. But we in the U.S. should be aware that similar stories can be easily found in this country as well. There must be a better way.

It is not often that someone does quite an extensive biography on a "chaotic" homeless person, and it is also not often that you get such insight into a country's system of taking care of it's poor. You get both with this book.
Stuart is a personality that you simultaneously root for and hate a little. Masters does not trump up Stuart and make him a hero - he is as real and as gritty in his biography as he probably was in life. It is an easy, fun, read with both humor and tragedy and I've already recommended it to several friends.
However, it is really more like four and a half stars. I can't quite put my finger on it, but something is missing. Perhaps it is the jumping around the author does, which is mostly successful but occasionally difficult to follow.
Regardless of what it is - this is not your usual biography. If you are interested in street life, in getting a glimpse of one man's "whys" behind it, or the system of social services in the UK, this book would be excellent.
Even if you aren't, it's a solid, well written, well researched read.