Just as there is nothing between the admirable omelet and the intolerable, so with autobiography.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Perfect objectivity is always impossible, no matter who writes a person's biography.
Usually, autobiography is such an indulgence of the ego.
The public figure of the writer, the writer-character, the 'personality-cult' of the author, are all becoming for me more and more intolerable in others, and consequently in myself.
No one can be profoundly original who does not avoid eccentricity.
The biography of a writer - or even the autobiography - will always have this incompleteness.
I'm completely indifferent to what genre I read provided that I feel sympathy with how a writer perceives being alive in the world.
Everything is autobiography, even if one writes something that is totally objective. The fact that it's a subject that seizes you makes it autobiographical.
I feel that if Jacques Pepin shows you how to make an omelet, the matter is pretty much settled. That's God talking.
I think anything that anyone writes that's any good is going to have a lot of autobiography.
Be content to remember that those who can make omelettes properly can do nothing else.