Eric Clapton's New Autobiography: "Slowread"

Ever since Cream's debut, I've been a big Eric Clapton fan. Among the artists of his generation, few have managed to evolve over the decades in such admirable fashion. In interviews, Clapton presents himself as a thoughtful, articulate and humble soul. When his autobiography was released recently, I was interested to learn more about the man. Bad decision.

To his credit, Clapton acknowledges that his drug addiction and alcoholism caused him to behave terribly and hurt many for over twenty years. He admits that he was a shallow, womanizing lout whose sole contribution to the world came in the form of music. Well done Eric.

So what's my problem with the book? Let's start with this---it's a boring read with little in the way of unexpected revelation or meaningful insights. Eric could've used a stronger ghost writer. Second, while he admits a modicum of bad behavior over the years, he tries to pass off a lifetime's worth of despicable acts by pointing toward a poor family support structure, neatly absolving himself of true responsibility for carrying on like a complete asshole for twenty plus years.

Third, I am troubled by his refusal to offer the slightest comment on any world issue at any point in his 40+ year career. He addresses this with a sentence or two at the end of the book by saying something about how this would detract from his musical presentation and that he just isn't that interested. I'm not buying that. My interpretation of his comments about values and his penchant for rifle hunting with $10,000 collector shotguns on private English game preserves makes me think he knows he would alienate much of his audience if he spoke openly about his political views.

And if his fans knew that he was indeed an asshole, would he continue having the financial clout to buy 150 foot luxury yachts and mansions throughout the world? For Eric, I get the impression that simply wouldn't do.