I think “buffering” implies that Michael was trying to shield certain aspects of his life, in hopes they would not be used or asked about for in the biography. He was attempting to display a positive side of his personality and life, so that only his pleasant qualities would be used in the book.

I believe that “Buffering the biography” meant that Michael was trying to moderate and protect certain experiences and facts from being used as part of the biography. By providing the author with comfort and hospitality he was trying to sway the author into seeing a lighter side of him. This is common in interviews and feature articles and sometimes bought by reporters.

In this context, I think “buffering the biography” refers to polishing the story in a way that would highlight the positive attributes of Michael Foot and minimize his negative attributes. It seems that Michael’s hopes is that if he treats someone hospitably, they would do the same.

Somehow Mr. Foot was impacting the biography, maybe leading the direction where it was heading to.

I think that “buffering the biography” suggests that Foot was trying to provide hospitality and generosity in a way that would try to sway the direction of the biography into his benefit. Naturally, someone wants to be portrayed in a positive light, with their positive characteristics highlighted and their less appealing ones unnoticed.

I guess “buffering the Biography” means that the process of writing the biography is very slow.

Buffering the biography implies that Mr.Foot was taking control of his biography. The Preface indicated that this was not a conventional biography, perhaps, Mr.Foot realized that and buffered the process, allowing for details to come at specific times. In addition, buffering usually indicates a delay. He may have delayed the the biographical process to give time to prepare himself to recollect on past incidents or ensure himself emotional control. Furthermore, it could mean the consideration Mr. Foot had for the biographer, allowing more time to get the story right.

I think the meaning of “buffering the biography” here is that Michael was trying to loosen up his life so that his life will be more simple, convenient and will be filled only with his amusing qualities.

If buffering means to “lessen or moderate the impact of something,” then buggering the biography is referring to Foot acting as moderator to lessen the impact of his life on the biography (or maybe even vice versa) by offering the biographer hospitality.

When someone buffers something, it usually pertains to hiding information about your life or some type of story. Michael was trying to focus primarily on his bright moments rather than hamper on his failures.

I feel that offering such hospitality to the author, Michael is trying to influence the author to omit particular information from the biography that he may deem negative, ultimately shielding and protecting himself.

By bufferring the biography the biographer eithermeans the subject is delaying it, or safeguarding it. Ensuring he is controlling the information and stories and protecting the truth.

What’s meant by “buffering the biography” is Foot was getting the biography ready, but getting it ready to be all around something he grants. Typically, buffering happens when you’re waiting for a video to play on the internet. Foot is ensuring the biography plays out on his terms, with the writer smoothing over anything negative, or could be turned negative by the media.

I think it means that Foot was trying to shield certain aspects of his life he may not have wanted made public. Whether positive or negative things were brought up, it seems like he still would only want some of those things displayed in a certain way.

Michael Foot expects the biography to be a lighthearted portrayal of his life; basically a book which highlights and reminds the public about all his good efforts and accomplishments. The biographer on the other hand, wants to dig deeper to get the full story, and uncover aspects of Foot’s life that are unknown to the public. The biographer does not want to sugar coat, or spare any details, which will impede Foot’s original perception.

It seems that in agreeing to do this biography, Foot already had expectations as to what he wants to be included. Based on this interaction, it seems that Foot is expecting a biography that highlights his positive and friendly self but from a reader’s standpoint, it would be hard to believe that a person has no bad traits. This clashes with the biographer’s expectations of reporting the truth because the truth includes the good and the bad.

Considering Mr. Foot openness to the making of this biography, He is looking for honesty and a true account of his political years and personal circle. Obviously, he wants to keep a positive overview of his life,and as you mentioned in the book, a biography that flows as smooth and natural as the “jolly talks” Mr. Foot and the author had.

This clashes with the biographer’s/journalist’s expectations because it is their job to reveal information regardless of what that information maybe.

I think Michael Foot expects the biography to sympathize his life and to the biographer Michael will be someone, he/she knows not just from “Documentary’s topic”, by changing the angle and holding compassion in the biographer’s mind. It clashed with the biographer/ journalist’s expectations.

Foot is looking for the biography to be honest and positive, highlighting his life in the fashion that he sees it. Naturally, his perception is that he is a just man and hope the biography delivers that, which may conflict with the biographer’s perception which is to be more objective.

The biographer is tasked with fully fleshing out Michael Foot, the good with the bad. Foot’s generous character opened him up to the writer, but naively (probably a harsh description) expected a rosy picture of himself.

Michael Foot seems to be expecting the biography to portray him in a positive light, to showcase his joviality. This clashes with the expectations of the biographer/journalist, who is there to report on all sides of his life, the good and bad and everything in between.

Michael Foot’s expectations about his biography focuses about his glowing achievements and effort towards becoming successful. The clash comes from the biographer desiring full context about Foot’s life. Focusing on his accolades and charming personality isn’t acceptable for the biographer. A biography needs a full story that will follow in somewhat chronological order, along with an actual flow rather than a list of moments.

Michael Foot is anticipating that the friendly exchanges between himself and the author will relate in his biography in a positive manner. This clashes with the expectations of the journalist because he has a clear plan to cover both the good and bad aspects of Michael’s life.

Michael expects the biography to praise him and highlight his most noteworthy and positive characteristics and occurrences. The biographer seeks to bring to light the holistic image of Michael, unpleasant instances and negatives included.

Michael Foot was expecting the biography to come from someone who holds compassion for him. Because of the hospitality he is lending to the writer, he has one view of how the biography will come out. Whilst, the biographer/writer despite the hospitality still plans to give the full story.

Foot appears to want an overview of his life and career in the positive light he sees himself in. This will likely clash with a biographer’s expectations because the biographer would want to provide a more objective viewpoint to his story.

Michael Foot is expecting the biography to be written in a positive manner. The biographer, on the other hand, is not looking to butcher the truth whatsoever and can not be bought or persuaded otherwise. He plans on telling the truth and nothing but.