I'm not spitting in my own soup, I love having spent my life thinking about these things-but you don't have to know anything about his life, even though I've just written a biography!
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
There are biographies, I looked at a lot of photographs of him, I heard his voice over and over and over again. You get in there and get to know the man by all of those pieces of information.
I believe there's only one autobiography you can do.
I am a total sucker for an actor's autobiography/biography. I have probably read most of them.
I never wanted to do biography just to tell the life of a famous man. I always wanted to use the life of a man to examine political power, because democracy shapes our lives.
An autobiography usually reveals nothing bad about its writer except his memory.
I see myself as writing biographies, the complete story of someone's life.
The stories are not autobiographical, but they're personal in that way. I seem to know only the things that I've learned. Probably some things through observation, but what I feel I know surely is personal.
He came to the States in 1963, I think with a view to making up with my mother, but that didn't work. He came for three weeks, and drank his way all over Brooklyn. And went back... I went to his funeral in Belfast.
I don't think anyone should write their autobiography until after they're dead.
'My Life' is not an autobiography. It's just music.