#biographies

For a WIP, I've been reading a lot of / about Virginia Woolf and listening to podcasts. When I was younger, I read many 'official' biographies, and I never questioned the image of Virginia they created as a fragile, (f)rigid, depressed genius. I still found it weird when I read some passages from To the Lighthouse or Orlando, because there are so many sensual passages it's hard to reconcile them with a sheer intellectual woman. Then I read Viviane Forrester's biography and it was a revelation : yes, Virginia was wild, funny, horny at times, strong, and the bouts of depression might also be due to the fact that every time a woman didn't comply, it was easier to deem her sick. I might agree that Forrester's vision was also quite extreme, but it was neeede much. So now, listening to a podcast reviving the picture of Woolf that had to be protected against herself, good for her Leonard sacrificed his own brilliant career and genius (btw, the letters he wrote his friends before his marriage were far from sacrificial) tocare about her, was kin of tough, but when it came to that sentence, right after Virginia committed suicided: "... because now a new life started, maybe the most interesting, as Leonard patiently and tirelessly brought Virginia's work to world-wide recognition...' I just slapped it shut, like wtf ?! How dare you say Virginia Woolf's biography gets more interesting once she's dead ? How can you even imply that her husband's -undeniable- work to make her writing recognized is actually more important than the fact she created it ? I mean for once, a husband is kind of slightly in the shade of his wife's success and it is admirable ? Pardon my French, mais allez bien vous faire cuire le cul, tous.