Greasy Lake

The Bruce Librarian VI: "Bruce" by Peter Ames Carlin

Published 2013-03-03
Karsten S. Andersen
By Karsten S. Andersen

“Bruce” by Peter Ames Carlin is one of the most talked-about Springsteen biographies ever put to print, and Greasy Lake must be the last publication with even the slightest interest in the protagonist to review it, and chances are, if you read this, you’ve already read a few other reviews. Heck, you probably already read the book and formed your own opinion.

Still, this column simply wouldn’t be complete without a piece on what is not only the most talked-about Bruce book, but also the most important one since Dave Marsh wrote his “Born to Run” book more than 30 years ago.

And now I already revealed that I liked it. A lot. Is it as good as it could have been and perhaps should have been? No, but it’s absolutely the best Springsteen biography that I have read, which, glancing at my two full shelves of all-Bruce books, actually says a lot.

If you have read the two books by Dave Marsh, “Born to Run” and “Glory Days” (later merged into one volume as “Two Hearts”), you know the basic Springsteen story. Very few books have added a whole lot to that. Sure, they’ve told it a little differently and added the missing years, albeit with very little true insight.

Enter “Bruce” by Carlin and that all changes. Even more than Marsh’s books, it relies on first-hand accounts from everybody from Bruce’s family to his bandmates and other associates, and, most importantly, from Bruce himself. Tons of interviews have been conducted. Carlin even hung out with Bruce on several occasions. The result is what appears to be the truest and most detailed portrait of Bruce Springsteen as a human being as we are likely to get until Bruce decides to write his own book.

While Dave Marsh’s books have been criticized for painting a somewhat rosy picture of Bruce, Carlin’s book reveals his flaws as well as his strengths. Much has already been said about the book’s disclosure of Bruce being on antidepressants, and we also learn that he’s not always the hearty pal to his band members and other employees as we may have thought.

But if you don’t like to read negative things about your hero, don’t let the above facts deter you. The reader is not left with an overall negative impression of Bruce at all. We may see him as more human, but that’s hardly a bad thing; on the contrary.

Perhaps the biggest strength of the book is its recounting of how Bruce became Bruce: his childhood and the years in Asbury Park before he became a star. Those first 25 years of his life take up almost half the book, and it’s not a page too much. With unprecedented detail and sense of authenticity, Peter Carlin writes about Bruce’s school years, his close relationship to his grandparents, his rebellion against his father. We even hear about his parents’ background, and not just because Carlin wants to demonstrate how much he knows, but because it actually matters to the story of how Bruce turned out. And reading these chapters, you don’t get the feeling that you’ve read it all a hundred times before. It’s the difference between reading a summary of a great novel and actually reading the novel. Reading Carlin’s book, it all falls into place: what it was like back then; what really happened and why; and what effect it had on the events that followed.

When all this is said, it is also undeniable that the second half of the book doesn’t maintain the same level as the first. Maybe it’s because once Bruce got his breakthrough and became a star, his life and career simply became less interesting and less dramatic. Or maybe the story is too well known to captivate us. But those things can’t be the whole explanation. What we would have given to hear about the breakup of the E Street Band, the “other band” tour, the confused Nineties, the superstardom of the mid-Eighties with as much detail and insight as the Steel Mill years! But we don’t. We do get lots of new information and it’s at a much higher level than in your average Bruce biography, but we’re still left wanting more. Could it be that the sources, who for the most part are still working with Bruce, became more protective of him and less inclined to share the goods as we approached the more recent times? Or was it just Carlin who couldn’t invest the same amount of energy and interest in the later decades if he was ever going to finish his project?

Those are just speculations, and whatever the case, it doesn’t deflect from the fact that this is the best Bruce Springsteen biography out there. And not just because of what we learn. All the interesting information in the world couldn’t make it a good book if the writing were bad. But that’s the thing. Peter Carlin writes so well, it’s hard to put the book down. The language flows like the lyrics of a favorite Bruce song, and altogether, the book is a joy to read on every level. Buy or borrow it, it doesn’t matter. If you have any interest in Bruce - and you wouldn’t be here if you didn’t - just read it. Now.


Add your comment

Please note that your comment will not become visible until it has been approved by an administrator. Comments that are rude, hateful, racist etc. will not be approved. It is not required to submit your email address, but if you do, it will not be shared with anyone or published on Greasy Lake.
Your comment
Your name
Your email
Anti-spam question: What is Bruce Springsteen's most common nickname?

Steve Meredith writes: Liked the book a lot but wanted to know more about the band breaking up and getting back together. And why didn't he include the fact that Little Steven joined Nils and him on stage in Europe in 1985.

Felt it got diluted a little once Bruce and Jon Landau got involved
Val writes: I bought it. I read it. I loved it! Very informative, especailly the early years. I loved the Janis Joplin part...don't walk...RUN! Ha!
Frank writes: Very nice and uselful review, thank you.
Personally, I'm not as enthusiastic as you are about Carlin's book, but I wholly agree with your analysis.
Tonu Tennosaar writes: I enjoyed the book except for the change that occurs half way where it goes from the engaging well written in-depth analysis to almost a rushed over view by the end. I had the same thought that perhaps the current band members felt comfortable discussing pre-break up events in detail but given they are now all on the payroll are either reluctant (or prevented) from speaking about post-reunion events. This would also presumably be true of all other possible interviewees currently involved with Bruce. For example, the possibility that Bruce may have needed & had some sort of voice training in the late 90's to refind his 'rock voice' is not even mentioned.
Welby writes: It was so non committal. It was downright boring the last 150 pages. Clarence was mad, Danny was sick, Bruce We need you. There was so much they glossed over that could be reasons the man is who he is...or isnt. When Bruce took Anti Depressants and said "What ever this is, give me more" ...interesting shit from a man who espouses he never did drugs. Anyway, pretty run of the mill
Richard writes: I found it a considerable improvement on the Marsh books in that it is that rare thing, a book with a degree of access to its subject that doesn't make him out to be 100% whiter than white at all times. The early years and up to Born in the USA are so well documented by other books that at least this time there is more on the family history, how much of his father is in Bruce, bipolarity and the much-commented on use of anti-depressants. The E Street interviews indicate that the sparse use of the band on Tunnel of Love caused lingering resentment ( Garry's comments on that and the way the reunion was instigated are particularly frank). So yes I wish there had been less of a rush through the post-1987 stuff, but it's better than I expected it to be.
James Devlin writes: I found the book to be trite and fan-boyish. I did learn new information, but I deeply feel that Ames-Carlin was the wrong author to tackle this biography. The grammatical errors and very poor use of footnotes made it a task for me to get through this book.

Bill Lane writes: I just got the book and JUST stated reading it. In the first 30ish pages I am really enjoying it. I am not much on reading a "no photos" book. I also have brain fade at some author's very wordy psycho analysis babble about what Bruces songs are supposed to be about! I can't do it!

This book is by far different. It does what BRUCE does and very well on both points - it TELLS ME A STORY - plainly without the self important psycho babble. Carlin does seem to have access to the real deal "dirt" like nothing else I have seen. I have learned LOTS of stuff already. A few pages at a time while "multitasking" in the bathroom. It is going to take a while until I am done!
Georgius writes: Does this book tell about how Bruce became a musician? Did he do some music courses in high school? How did he practice guitar playing, did he do endless scales or just the basic chord book, why and when did he start writing onwn songs etc?

I`m not inerested of his private life or what medication he takes, I`m very interested is Bruce as a musician.
Deborah Brooks writes: I enjoyed it overall, but kind felt bogged down in the manager, contract, this producer, that producer, this person was the technician, etc... I guess I wanted a bit more about being a father/husband...not PERSONAL..I know he keeps his life private and he SHOULD, but I know he is said to be an exceptional father and so many rockers DON"T pull that off.
Greasy Lake News Archive
Greasy Lake has covered Springsteen since 1997. The news archive contains tons of information from all the years.
1997 1998 1999 2000
2001 2002 2003 2004
2005 2006 2007 2008
2009 2010 2011 2012
Click on icon to subscribe to Greasy Lake with your news reader
Click on icon to follow Greasy Lake on Facebook
Click on icon to follow Greasy Lake on Twitter