
The Guardian view on posthumously publishing Joan Didion: goodbye to all that
Debate about the ethics of posthumous publication has been ignited once more, this time with Didion at its centre. After the writer's death in 2021, about 150 pages were found in a file next to her desk. These were meticulous accounts of sessions with her psychiatrist, from 1999 to 2003, focused mainly on her adopted daughter Quintana, who was spiralling into alcoholism. Addressed to her husband, screenwriter John Gregory Dunne, this journal has been published under the title Notes to John. 'No restrictions were put on access,' we are told in a brief, anonymous introduction, presumably the ghostly hand of her literary estate.
The history of posthumous works is a long and contentious one, from Virgil's Aeneid to the publication of Gabriel García Márquez's Until August last year. Márquez's sons excused their 'act of betrayal' in publishing this abandoned novel against the Nobel laureate's wishes as a service to his readers. In 2009, Vladimir Nabokov's son published his father's incomplete last work, The Original of Laura, 30 years after his death, despite his instructions that the novel be destroyed.
Harper Lee's 'lost' manuscript Go Set a Watchman (discovered in a safe deposit box) caused a sensation when it was published in 2015. Lee was 89 and in very poor health. It became the fastest-selling novel in HarperCollins history. But the critical verdict on all these recent 'rediscoveries' was that the authors had good reasons not to want them published.
However, it is not always a case of publish and be damned. Most famously, we would not have Kafka's The Trial had his executor, Max Brod, not ignored his demand that it be burned. 'Don't pull the Max Brod-Kafka trick on me,' Michel Foucault reportedly warned his friends.
Henry James made a 'gigantic bonfire' of his archive. Thomas Hardy followed suit. Philip Larkin's diaries, more prosaically, were committed to a shredding machine and then the University of Hull's boiler house. 'What he wished to be remembered would be remembered,' Larkin wrote of Hardy. 'What he wished forgotten would be forgotten.'
How much of Notes to John was meant to be forgotten? Didion wrote two memoirs: The Year of Magical Thinking, after Dunne's sudden death in 2003, and, later, Blue Nights, about her relationship with Quintana, who died in 2005 at the age of 39. In both, her daughter's addiction is gracefully elided.
Didion was America's literary celebrity. Aged 80, famous for her sunglasses, the author became the face of luxury fashion house Celine. Today, her image is printed on tote bags for bookish hipsters. Notes to John is a further offering to the cult of Joan. What could be more irresistible than her therapy notes?
It seems unlikely that Didion, that most reticent of people and most exacting of writers, would have welcomed these intimate, unedited journals seeing the light of day. But it is implausible that she would have been unaware of the inevitability of their publication. In Notes for John we see Didion bare-faced. We see her pain. But still she remains an enigma.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Materialists review – Dakota Johnson torn between Pedro Pascal and Chris Evans in charming romcom
Say you are a single woman in New York and you are, in the words of the song, torn between two lovers: two handsome, intelligent, nice guys – one very poor and one very rich. All things being equal, who do you go for? The answer in real life is very different, in fact diametrically opposed, to the answer in a film. Few movie heroines have the candour of Jane Austen's Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice, who admitted to falling in love with Mr Darcy on seeing his beautiful grounds at Pemberley. But this is the choice, which never quite ascends to the state of a dilemma, in this charming and watchable – yet for me somehow anticlimactic – romantic comedy-drama from South Korean-Canadian film-maker Celine Song: a love-triangle confection to follow the much realer, truer love triangle of Song's much acclaimed debut Past Lives. When the decision is made, the final act has an almost morosely elegiac mood, as it must, as various speeches and set pieces reconcile its rather trudgingly earnest direction of travel with the witty, savvy materialism of the movie's premise. The scene is, of course, Manhattan where Lucy, played by Dakota Johnson, is a matchmaker, arranging dates and introductions for professionals who want to get married or, in fact, to settle. The movie begins varnished with a commercial glaze of luxury, that aspirational state of material wealth that marriage underpins and which no one apologises for wanting. Lucy is about to pull off her professional and personal masterpiece; she is unofficial guest of honour at the chi-chi wedding she has masterminded for a tremulous female client who has bagged a rich financial guy. The groom's unmarried straight brother is hedge-fund manager Harry, played by Pedro Pascal: tall, well built, sophisticated, rocking a non-rental tux, clearly very rich and very interested in Lucy personally. He's basically a nice, non-psycho version of American Psycho's Patrick Bateman. In fact, for much of the early stages of the film, the dialogue does have something of Bret Easton Ellis: observations about wealth exchanged on a level of murmuringly subdued rational calm. No one is trying to be funny. This is just the way it is. But just as Harry is putting the moves on Lucy at the reception, her ex-boyfriend John (Chris Evans) serves her a drink. Humiliatingly, he is a failing actor reduced to side-hustling as a waiter for a catering company, still sharing a chaotic apartment with three other appalling losers in their 30s. And so Lucy's relationship with the glamorous and stylish Harry proceeds in parallel with this bittersweet and inconvenient reconnection with the broke, lovable (and hot) John – flashbacks reveal that Lucy, now a supercool professional, was once much more vulnerable and emotional with John. The film does not play one suitor off against the other; there is no Mark Darcy/Daniel Cleaver-style punch-up. They are mutually respectful and both supposed to be worthy of Lucy, though Harry does have a certain secret that will have audiences doing some Googling after the film, a secret so startling on its own terms that its vulgar metaphoric potential didn't occur to me until much later. Song was herself, she has revealed, once employed as a matchmaker. Unlike Lucy – who tells her clients she can't just magically produce ideal mates or, like Dr Frankenstein, build them – Song can effectively do exactly this in her imaginary world, and place Lucy with an ideal man. The idealism replaces the materialism; the romanticism that comes with it is subdued. Materialists is in UK and Irish cinemas from 13 August


The Guardian
8 hours ago
- The Guardian
Materialists review – Dakota Johnson torn between Pedro Pascal and Chris Evans in charming romcom
Say you are a single woman in New York and you are, in the words of the song, torn between two lovers: two handsome, intelligent, nice guys – one very poor and one very rich. All things being equal, who do you go for? The answer in real life is very different, in fact diametrically opposed, to the answer in a film. Few movie heroines have the candour of Jane Austen's Elizabeth Bennet in Pride and Prejudice, who admitted to falling in love with Mr Darcy on seeing his beautiful grounds at Pemberley. But this is the choice, which never quite ascends to the state of a dilemma, in this charming and watchable – yet for me somehow anticlimactic – romantic comedy-drama from South Korean-Canadian film-maker Celine Song: a love-triangle confection to follow the much realer, truer love triangle of Song's much acclaimed debut Past Lives. When the decision is made, the final act has an almost morosely elegiac mood, as it must, as various speeches and set pieces reconcile its rather trudgingly earnest direction of travel with the witty, savvy materialism of the movie's premise. The scene is, of course, Manhattan where Lucy, played by Dakota Johnson, is a matchmaker, arranging dates and introductions for professionals who want to get married or, in fact, to settle. The movie begins varnished with a commercial glaze of luxury, that aspirational state of material wealth that marriage underpins and which no one apologises for wanting. Lucy is about to pull off her professional and personal masterpiece; she is unofficial guest of honour at the chi-chi wedding she has masterminded for a tremulous female client who has bagged a rich financial guy. The groom's unmarried straight brother is hedge-fund manager Harry, played by Pedro Pascal: tall, well built, sophisticated, rocking a non-rental tux, clearly very rich and very interested in Lucy personally. He's basically a nice, non-psycho version of American Psycho's Patrick Bateman. In fact, for much of the early stages of the film, the dialogue does have something of Bret Easton Ellis: observations about wealth exchanged on a level of murmuringly subdued rational calm. No one is trying to be funny. This is just the way it is. But just as Harry is putting the moves on Lucy at the reception, her ex-boyfriend John (Chris Evans) serves her a drink. Humiliatingly, he is a failing actor reduced to side-hustling as a waiter for a catering company, still sharing a chaotic apartment with three other appalling losers in their 30s. And so Lucy's relationship with the glamorous and stylish Harry proceeds in parallel with this bittersweet and inconvenient reconnection with the broke, lovable (and hot) John – flashbacks reveal that Lucy, now a supercool professional, was once much more vulnerable and emotional with John. The film does not play one suitor off against the other; there is no Mark Darcy/Daniel Cleaver-style punch-up. They are mutually respectful and both supposed to be worthy of Lucy, though Harry does have a certain secret that will have audiences doing some Googling after the film, a secret so startling on its own terms that its vulgar metaphoric potential didn't occur to me until much later. Song was herself, she has revealed, once employed as a matchmaker. Unlike Lucy – who tells her clients she can't just magically produce ideal mates or, like Dr Frankenstein, build them – Song can effectively do exactly this in her imaginary world, and place Lucy with an ideal man. The idealism replaces the materialism; the romanticism that comes with it is subdued. Materialists is in UK and Irish cinemas from 13 August


Telegraph
2 days ago
- Telegraph
British Nobel prize winner labels fellow recipient ‘racist'
The British Nobel literature laureate Abdulrazak Gurnah has labelled one of his predecessors 'racist'. The Tanzanian-British novelist, who was awarded the Nobel prize in 2021, said he could no longer read the works of the late laureate Sir VS Naipaul. Speaking at the Edinburgh International Book Festival, he said that the realisation had slowly dawned on him and led him to reread Naipaul's earlier work, which in turn cemented his opinion. Trinidadian-born British author Naipaul, who was knighted in 1990 and awarded the Nobel prize for literature in 2001, was a divisive but acclaimed author, who achieved his breakthrough with his semi-autobiographical novel A House for Mr Biswas. He won the Booker prize in 1971 for his novel In a Free State, and achieved success with his 1975 novel Guerillas. However, his personal views were questioned by many of his contemporaries. Naipaul had negative views on post-colonial life and wrote about the 'primitivism' of African societies. He also said it was a 'mistake' being born in Trinidad. Gurnah, who is best known for Paradise, By the Sea and Desertion, said that Naipaul was once someone he had 'read with great admiration'. He said he believed Naipaul was less cautious about expressing racist views as he became older and more acclaimed. Speaking at the festival in Scotland, Gurnah said: 'At a certain point of reading him, I thought, 'It's true, this guy is a racist.' 'And I can't read him any more. The case [that he is a racist] becomes less difficult in his later books.' 'Unguarded' racism He cited the author's 1979 work A Bend in the River, saying: 'It is in an unguarded form in some of his later writings. As he became older he [perhaps] became less careful.' Gurnah said he could no longer read the works of Saul Bellow, the late Canadian-American writer, either. 'I think I probably read everything he had written with great admiration and then a certain point came when Bellow was being asked which African writers do you read or admire, and he said, 'When you produce your Zulu Tolstoy then I will read that',' Gurnah said. '[I thought], 'Right, I can't read that guy any more.'' He continued: 'I'm afraid there are several writers that I read with great admiration who are now in that category. Because you find out more. 'You read with pleasure and a certain kind of innocence and then you learn more and think, well.' The author, who became a literature professor at the University of Kent, moved to the UK in the 1960s as a refugee from Zanzibar. He left aged 17, four years after a coup broke out in the former British protectorate. 'There's something dramatic about being displaced,' Gurnah previously told The Telegraph. 'I see it as an experience of our times and one that allows me to comment on certain issues and ask questions about the divisions between this land and another or the now and the before.'