John Carey, who served as the chief literary critic for The Sunday Times for an impressive 46 years starting in 1977, was a paragon of literary criticism. Known for his unwavering commitment, Carey produced a review every fortnight, undeterred by weather, holidays, or illness. His dedication to the craft made him an ideal critic, revered by many and feared by some.
Carey was a man of modesty, often eschewing the flamboyant aspects of literary life. He seldom attended literary parties and maintained a sparse circle of literary friends, ensuring that nothing interfered with his work. His reviews were renowned for their moral clarity, often targeting pomposity and snobbery, traits he found antithetical to his egalitarian beliefs rooted in Orwellian ideals.
The Critic’s Fierce Independence
Carey’s independence was legendary. At a Sunday Times Books Christmas party, a fellow critic, irked by a review, poured a glass of wine over him, a testament to the impact of his unyielding honesty. His intellectual prowess was further demonstrated during his tenure as Merton Professor of English Literature at Oxford University, where he authored insightful works on literary giants such as Dickens, Milton, Thackeray, and John Donne.
His ability to distill complex ideas into accessible prose was unmatched. “Surely Shakespeare’s life cannot have been as boring as this,” he quipped about a biography of the Bard, showcasing his penchant for paradox and humor. Carey’s versatility was evident in his work, from editing The Faber Book of Science to reviewing books on subjects as diverse as Tintin and Tintoretto.
Humor and Insight
Despite his formidable intellect, Carey possessed a sharp wit, often overlooked by those intimidated by his intelligence. He once described the Victorian historian Thomas Carlyle as “so poisonous it’s a wonder his mind didn’t infect his bloodstream.” Similarly, he critiqued philosopher Roger Scruton’s writing as “ponderous, impenetrable and grindingly repetitive,” likening it to “someone trying to unwrap his lunchtime sandwich with the aid of a fork-lift truck.”
“Reviewing, he confessed, was like a drug to him. If he didn’t have something to work on, he would get itchy.”
Carey’s passion for reviewing was evident in his meticulous selection of books, often annotated with preferences and accompanied by a note expressing his willingness to tackle additional titles. His enthusiasm was infectious, and his nudges for new assignments were a testament to his insatiable appetite for literary critique.
Controversy and Admiration
Carey was not without his detractors. His 1992 book The Intellectuals and the Masses, which critiqued the elitism of literary modernism, and his 2005 work What Good Are the Arts? stirred controversy. Yet, his legion of admirers, including Nobel laureate Kazuo Ishiguro, praised his ability to transcend academic pretensions, infusing his critiques with personal experience.
“There were so many things I loved about him — his courage, his clarity, perhaps above all his unbridled enthusiasm for books and writing.” — Dominic Sandbrook
Carey’s influence extended beyond his reviews. He played a pivotal role in the career of Seamus Heaney, championing the young poet whose work would later earn a Nobel Prize. This advocacy was emblematic of Carey’s impact on literary culture, fostering talent and nurturing the literary landscape.
A Lasting Legacy
For those who worked alongside Carey, his presence was both a guiding light and a standard to aspire to. His editor at The Sunday Times reflected on the privilege of working with him, striving to model the publication’s literary pages on Carey’s principles of clarity and engagement.
As the literary world bids farewell to John Carey, his legacy as a critic remains unparalleled. He was a beacon of integrity, intellect, and passion, setting a benchmark for literary criticism that continues to inspire. His absence leaves a void, yet his contributions endure, a testament to his brilliance and dedication to the written word.
