... Michael White has produced a biography which relates the basic facts about Tolkien (concentrating mostly on his early life), but offers nothing very credible in terms of any insight into the man himself. The suggestion, for example, that being bitten by a tarantula when a small child was the genesis of Shelob is mildly interesting, but it doesn't reveal a great deal about Tolkien's creative processes and thinking. Similarly, the revelation that White considers Tolkien to have used people he knew in the creation of some of his characters is hardly an earth-shattering insight into the mind of the author. Crucially, there is almost nothing by way of any serious attempt to reconcile or tie in Tolkien's experience of Catholicism with the mythology of Middle Earth. White does try to draw some half-hearted allegorical links (including the remarkable suggestion that Frodo was a Christ-figure), but misses the (surely obvious and intended, albeit not allegorical) connection between the Ainur and the Angelic Host. He also manages to have Sam in Mordor praying to the "demi-goddesses" (sic) Luthien Tinuviel and Galadriel rather than, as he actually did, to Elbereth (one of the arch-angelic Valar), which betrays a shameful lack of knowledge of the book, as well as a bizarre spin on Tolkien's characters and characterisations.
Tolkien himself was a very private man who saw no reason why the readers of his books should need to know anything about their author's private life. One suspects, therefore, that he would have hated any biography of him, and White's book provides ample justification for his attitude. Unsupported assumptions are used to make the foundations for towering edifices of supposition, and imagined thoughts woven into a sometimes lurid tapestry of his life. The text is littered with sweeping asides about topics such as the "bitchiness" of academic life in Oxford and White's prejudices about Catholicism; famous names (e.g. Richard Burton) are dropped into the text when they have no relevance whatsoever to Tolkien; and the net effect seems to be to try to simulate sensation in the absence of proper scholarship. The list of acknowledgements features none of Tolkien's family nor even anyone who could be considered to be a primary source. No original source material is quoted nor attributed. The internet, on the other hand, clearly has been a prime source of material. Small wonder the detail is so thin and the evidence presented so sketchy.
To make matters worse, the book suffers from some appallingly sloppy spelling and punctuation. Where was the editor? At times, this is amusing: the opening sentence of the book, for example, has Tolkien "peddling" (sic) fast through the streets of Oxford, which paints an interesting (if unintended!) picture of his eagerness to sell his books. Generally, however, it is intensely annoying, especially in a biography of someone whose life was the academic study of linguistics, language and literature. There are also some unforgivable errors of fact, which highlight the evident lack of care in the production of the book. White has clearly confused Dorothy Sayers, the English novelist and playwright, who had numerous Oxford connections and had friends in common with Tolkien, and Dorothy Parker, the American wit and writer. Which does White mean? They were two very different people, and so the quoted response of Tolkien reveals very different attitudes depending on which woman he was reacting to. As noted in the previous review, White seems unable to distinguish between the Prussian and Austro-Hungarian Empires. He places the Garrick Club in Mayfair, which it isn't. Small stuff, perhaps (though the Sayers/Parker confusion isn't trivial), but the impression given is that of a piece of carelessly-written, badly-researched and sloppy work, hastily produced to coincide with the film (which is heavily promoted in the final chapter).
Frankly, not worth buying or reading.