ABSTRACT
Tennyson, who was a strong admirer of Jane Austen, remarked, before the publication of the Memoir by James Austen-Leigh, that he was thankful that no more was known about her than about Shakespeare: sheer absence of data obviated the temptation to distracting and unverifiable speculation. Up to a point he was right: an imaginative writer lives in his works, and if a reader has only those by which to shape his judgment, he usually has nearly all that is essential. But Tennyson was not entirely right: if we knew more about Shakespeare's life, we might well be able to eliminate some of the teasing difficulties which obstruct the judgment of some of his plays. And not only does some biography afford clarification of a writer's work, but it can serve a valuable introductory function : if a writer lives in his work, we can only receive this life by feeling open to it; but it is difficult for many readers to escape an initial prejudice that if a writer is himself dead then the presumption is that his work is dead too. No logic supports this prejudice, but biography, by helping the reader to feel the writer's reality as a person, will do more than argument to dissipate it. Finally, whatever the advantages or disadvantages of possessing biographical knowledge, once the facts have been revealed they cannot be ignored : we have to read a writer to some extent in the light of what we know about his life, even if we end by deciding that what we know is of very little help to us in reaching our final estimate.
