Few writers have been written about over time as much as Patricia Highsmith. She cannot be overlooked but yet looked down on. Writers and journalists who probably got the assignment to write about her and accept it to be able to buy lobsters for the evening dinners with their outward literary friends, fulfills the task by familiarly call her “Pat” even though they never met her and for to accomplish the writing task, they read what others before have wrote about Highsmith, to then belches the same derogatory description of her as a person and about her privat life.
I’ll give you an example:
“Patricia Highsmith was an accretion of oddities — a woman who doted on her pet snails and carried a selection of them in her handbag, who abandoned her native America for a restless life in Europe, and who turned a habitual paranoia into literature.” Andrew Taylor, The Spectator (2016/05/crime-pursues-the-crime-writer)
On of the most negative and all trough undocumented information I’ve have so far read about Highsmith is to find of in Jeanette Winterson’s review in New York Times of Joan Shenkar’s biography of Highsmith. Well, maybe it is Shenkar who is Winterson’s source for slandering Highsmith? If so, it certainly not gives me a desire to read Shenkar!
Even not read all there is about Highsmith, what I have read give me disgust and reluctance to read anymore about her. I’ll stick to her novels! But if to believe Winterson, Highsmith was not only a person impregnated by character flaws and bad behavior, she was not much of a writer either! But Shenker writing about her is a according to Winterson a brilliant writer “Schenkar’s writing is witty, sharp and light-handed, a considerable achievement given the immense detail of this biography.”